'Mutts like me' shows Obama's racial comfort.

Originally posted by ZAKAR:You are a fraud dude!!!! What is the percentage of WEALTH the black community controls in relationship to the overall Wealth of America?

There is nothing fraudulent about anything I've posted. What is fraudulent is your lame ass claim of all BGLO's being part of a boule. The only source you use to backup your worthless accusation is, Steve Cokely, a deranged, separatist fool that tries to spread fear, paranoia, and negroid enviousness to the masses of black people dumb enough to listen to his lies. I've already proven with evidence from his own website, SteveCokely.com--Live and Uncensored! that he's a damn liar:

The statement that, "The family alleges that the Reverends Jesse L. Jackson and Samuel Billy Kyles are complicit in the assassination of Dr. King" was wrongfully and erroneously attributed to the King Family.

The Final Call retracts this statement as having no basis in fact or proof. SteveCokely.com

Not only are you a flim flam artist, zakar, you can't even stick to your own retarded method of questioning. Here's what you've been saying throughout this thread:

quote:

Posted by zakar November 10, 2008 09:07 AM AFRICAN PEOPLE HAD BEEN SHUT COMPLETELY OUT OF THE WEALTH SYSTEM FOR 400 YEARS AND YOU EXPECT IN 50 YEARS BLACK PEOPLKE ALL OF A SUDDENLY INDIVIDUALLY GONNA IN MASS BECOME WEALTHY, WHEN THE FEW BLACK PEOPLE WITH EDUCATION AND MONE TOOK ADVANATAGE OF THE SO CALLED INTERGRATION MOVEMENT TO ABANDOM THEIR COMMUNITIES..

Posted by zakar November 12, 2008 10:13 PM Blacks dont have no WEALTH YOU IDIOT.

Posted by zakar November 12, 2008 10:31 PM aight greek faggot boy, show me where the black WEALTH is? How much WEALTH does black people as a group have????

Posted by zakar November 12, 2008 10:48 PM Now how much wealth did you say black people had??

Posted by zakar November 13, 2008 12:34 AMIm still waiting on your numbers for how much wealth black people have Greek boy!

Posted by zakar November 13, 2008 11:33 PMFuthermore idiot you still refuse to show me how much wealth Africans in American has?

You obviously can't read, and the little bit you can read you can barely comprehend, if at all, what you read, so I'll help you out, dumbass.

Answer to zakar's ignorant ass claim:The Consumer Federation of America report found that median household wealth among blacks grew 321% between 1989 and 1998, from $3,680 in 1989 to $15,500. However, that still was less than a quarter of the $71,700 accumulated by the typical American household.

African-Americans are beginning to close the wealth gap with the rest Americans, according to an analysis of Federal Reserve data released today by the Consumer Federation of America (CFA) and BET.com. From 1989 to 2001, the ratio of median black household wealth to median U.S. household wealth rose from 9.1% to 22.1%. Over the past decade, African-Americans have made significant progress closing the wealth gap which has separated them from the rest of America, said Stephen Brobeck, CFA Executive Director. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Every dumbass question you've asked and ignorant ass statement you've made in reference to black wealth has been debunked. Then you shamelessly twist your argument to this:

Revised dumbass question #1 by zakar:"What is the percentage of WEALTH the black community controls in relationship to the overall Wealth of America?"

Now, let's go back to your original statement. You originally said: "blacks have no wealth", and I debunked that ignorant ass statement not with an irrational opinion such as yours but with factual information from the census bureau and the department of labor and several other sources. Furthermore:

A national poll released four years ago revealed some stunning news about the economic progress of black Americans. In a historic first, more blacks (51%) than whites (32%) reported that their economic situation had improved in the past year. And only 9% of blacks, against 17% of whites, said they were worse off. Subsequent polls have produced similar results, and even the most cursory glance at data still trickling out of the 2000 Census helps explain why.

Poverty rates are down and employment rates are up. Blacks own more homes and make more money. They occupy less-segregated communities in more-prosperous parts of the country. Graduation rates have risen both at the high school and college levels, as has the number of black-owned businesses. Racial gaps do persist generally, but in most categories the gap has narrowed, and in a few it has even disappeared. By any honest measure, blacks are significantly better off today than at any time in U.S. history.

You can argue the facts with your own unsubstantiated bullshit by yourself. The facts remain right there in your face. You said blacks have no wealth when I have proven not only do they have wealth, they also have accumilated more wealth in the last 30 years. It's all right there in black and white as well as links to the original sources. You can flip flop all you want. The information has been provided time and time again. Keep on lying and making up shit--the information is right there in your face.

You're a liar, a fraud, and a flim flam artist, zakar. And you base your ignorance and stupidity on a known flim flam artist--Steve Cokely. You don't have one leg to stand on. Your pointless insults, diversions, redirecting, and distractions have no effect. The evidence is right there to prove your dumbass otherwise whether you want to admit it or not.

Originally posted by OhBlackButterfly:~Romulus, what is the alumni "member count" (ballpark figure) for all of the black greek letter organizations...combined? What kind of impact do you think that they could have on the situations in the black community if they all had a purposeful intent on "giving back" in some way, shape, or form to the black community? Little impact? Huge? Just curious. I'm sure that some do make that effort. But, my question really is about what would happen if all of them had such an interest. You know, like we all do have some interests in common on a human level, on a cultural level. I'm just wondering about the possibilities of a "critical mass" of progressive blacks collectively descending upon the black community. I'm thinking along the lines of that "change" from the grass roots that President Obama speaks of. And I'm guessing that this is Zakar's bone of contention...not enough "give back" from blacks that think much of their personal successes and achievements. I wonder if Obama will reach out to that part of the black population specifically and seek their help with his plans. ~

Several years ago it was estimated that Alpha Phi Alpha had around 150,000 members--give or take a few thousand. So, in the interest of time, lets say the most popular BGLO's Alpha Phi Alpha, Kappa Alpha Psi, Omega Psi Phi, Phi Beta Sigma, Alpha Kappa Alpha, Delta Sigma Theta, and Zeta Phi Beta have a combined total of over a million people--give or take a few thousand.

Now, here's what you have to understand about BGLO's: The basis of fraternities and sororities is scholarship and service to the community in the collegiate level and, in particular, service to the community, on the alumni level. People on the outside looking in always assume fraternities and sororities are about nothing but partying and step shows. Socializing is a part of greek life on the collegiate and alumni levels. However, each organization has their own programs that are dedicated to addressing the various issues in the black community.

Alpha Phi Alpha, for examle, has several national programs such as Mentoring, World and National Affairs, Project Alpha, Leadership Training Institute, Alpha Academy, Go To High School, Go To College, Commission on Business, A Voteless People is a Hopeless People, Alpha Head Start Academy, Big Brothers, Big Sisters, March of Dimes, RIF, Cooperative Programs and Economic Development.

Alphas as well as any other BGLO's have helped black communities under the name of their prospective organizations, banded together in a panhellenic capacity or as individuals. There isn't a sector of the community, black or otherwise, where a frat brother or sorority sister isn't involved at the grass roots, local, state, federal or international level. True, some greeks may not be as involved as others while others make a lifelong commitment but no one can say that members of BGLO's are not involved in the black community.

The problem with people on the outside looking in is they only see greeks in action when we're wearing paraphernalia or when someone reads an article or hears a news report about some hazing activity, otherwise, we as well as our deeds and accomplishments in the black community are invisible. And 99% of the time you're not going to see a member of a BGLO running around the city in paraphernalia, particularly, the grown ass brothers and sisters that have matriculated and are serving their prospective alumni chapters of their organization throughout the community in normal street clothes. I've often run into Greeks of my own organization as well as other greek organizations that I had no idea were greek but were deeply involved in the black community on all levels. So take that into account before you listen to some idiot(s) that run around misinformed and miseducating people out of jealousy and enviousness.

You find any brothers in that picture wearing paraphernalia you let me know.

No matter how much bullshyt you continue to write , or crazy articles you paste to this website. The fact of the matter you are still a faggot Greek Boy , and you know you organization is connected to the Boule!!

I know it's easy for illiterate people like you to dismiss and/or deny the facts primarily since you consider rumors to be more factual than the actual facts. Using white, Republican, Palinesque tactics like repeating lies in the effort to make lies appear true are pointless. Nevertheless, I'll take this childish utterance of blind, mislead, miseducated stupidity as "You're right, Romulus and I was wrong. I've wasted valuable time acting like a coon while I haven't been able to produce a credible source to support my unsubstantiated bullshit. Evidence pointing to Steve Cokely's own website proving that his accusations have proven to be lies destroys Steve Cokely's credibility. And the fact that several other sources use Steve Cokely's same crackheaded accusations to support their unsubstantiated claims also destroys their credibility."

Peace

quote:

Futhermore idiot you still refuse to show me how much wealth Africans in American has?

More proof that not only do you not know how to read or spell, nor do you know how to write considering your countless sentence fragments, hyperboles, poor subject verb agreements, syntax errors, and in many cases writing entire paragraphs with a gross lack of or no punctuation at all, and run-on sentences. As I told you before previously in the thread, You weren't off the hook in regards to the conversation of the wealth of blacks. Since I have two idiots, you, zakar, and afro-saxon crying the same ignorant, uninformed tune I'll put you both to rest with one comprehensive, federally supported report of the progress as well as wealth of blacks in the United States in a 50 year period:

Closing the GapFourty Years of Economic Progress for Blacks

The research described in this report was sponsored by the U.S. Department of LaborFull Report.

The extent of the improvement in the relative economic status of blacks over the last forty years is obviously impressive. This improvement is largely an untold story, belying the widely held view that the relative economic position of blacks in America has been stagnant. However, one must remember that even in 1980, black male incomes still significantly lagged behind those of whites.

We also investigated the notion that the wage gains achieved by black men would disappear over their work careers. Some observers have expressed concern that significant parts of these wage gains would eventually be lost as competition between the races intensifies over job careers. However, the reality is that, if anything, black men actually improved their status relative to whites as their respective careers unfolded. Among every cohort of workers between 1940 and 1980, black men narrowed the gap between their incomes and those of their white contemporaries as their careers evolved.

......Average labor market gains were heavily skewed, with some blacks receiving the bulk of the benefits, leaving large numbers of black men behind. The evidence does not support this view. Whether we distinguish among low- or middle-income blacks, between the old and the young, or the more and less educated, the incomes of the black men have risen relative to comparable whites.

The only group of working black males whose relative wage gains could accurately be characterized as small were those within the bottom 10 percent of the black income distribution. While all blacks participated in this economic progress, some groups did gain more than others. For example, younger blacks gained more relative to whites than did more experience black workers. And when we separated our samples by education class, we found that college-educated blacks enjoyed the largest wage improvement.

Moving right along...

The Good News on RaceThe census shows real progress for black Americans.

A national poll released four years ago revealed some stunning news about the economic progress of black Americans. In a historic first, more blacks (51%) than whites (32%) reported that their economic situation had improved in the past year. And only 9% of blacks, against 17% of whites, said they were worse off. Subsequent polls have produced similar results, and even the most cursory glance at data still trickling out of the 2000 Census helps explain why.

Poverty rates are down and employment rates are up. Blacks own more homes and make more money. They occupy less-segregated communities in more-prosperous parts of the country. Graduation rates have risen both at the high school and college levels, as has the number of black-owned businesses. Racial gaps do persist generally, but in most categories the gap has narrowed, and in a few it has even disappeared. By any honest measure, blacks are significantly better off today than at any time in U.S. history.

If this surprises you, forgive yourself. The media and political drone of negativity about such matters can be overwhelming. Our national conversations on race tend to be dominated by those who have a vested interest in glass-half-empty assessments of progress. The census data, however, tell a remarkably different story. The evidence shows that America's long history of racial progress has continued and if anything accelerated in recent years.

"The numbers are obvious to anyone who looks at them," said Edward Glaeser, a Harvard demographer and economist. "Sociologists have somehow managed to blind themselves to the fact that there were changes for the better, and in terms of historical trends there were big changes."Segregation is just one example provided by Mr. Glaeser, who used Census 2000 data to analyze 291 metropolitan areas; he found all but 19 of them more integrated than in 1990. The findings perpetuate a 30-year trend that has left segregation levels at their lowest point since 1920. Racial segregation remains a problem in some areas--particularly in large Rust Belt cities--but it is undeniable that the situation has greatly improved.

Rising incomes have allowed more black families to quit these ghettos, and a better-educated black populace has lifted earnings. The census figures for 2000 show a record-low black poverty rate (22%) and a record-high black median household income ($30,000). The corresponding figures for whites--8% and $44,000--reveal that blacks still have a way to go.

But more striking is the progress already made: Just 20 years ago, the black poverty rate was 36%, and household income stood at one-third of what it is today. Moreover, the racial disparity is steadily shrinking. Between 1967 and 1997, black household incomes rose 31%; over the same period white household incomes rose by only 18%.

Economic ascension has always been linked to educational achievement, but never more so than it is today. "There are many valid reasons that prompt individuals to pursue higher levels of education," notes a 1998 Census Bureau report. "One of the most convincing, though, is the economic return associated with increased schooling."

In 1980, barely one in two blacks over 25 held a high school diploma. Today that figure is just under 80%. For blacks in the 25-29 age group, the figure is 86%, the same as for whites. And in less than 20 years, the number of black college graduates has doubled. This progress should only increase public anger over those inner-city public schools that still leave too many black kids behind.

These educational strides surely underpin black monetary gains, but they also speak pointedly to the current state of race relations. In America today, education has become a far better indicator of socioeconomic status than race. For a nation barely one generation removed from Jim Crow's grasp, this is no mean feat.

Which is why efforts to downplay or even dismiss black achievement are so disturbing. Blinkered civil-rights leaders see only shortcomings, while liberal public servants play divisive victim politics. (Too many conservatives ignore the issue altogether.) The resulting noise keeps much of the public--white and black--ignorant of the truth that upwardly mobile minorities are the American norm. Census 2000 data, much of which are still forthcoming, deserve more attention and ought to play an important role in this discussion--at least among those who care about facts.

WASHINGTON (AP) "” Black Americans are earning more than ever, but a lack of investment experience and conflicting attitudes toward saving money stand in the way of accumulating wealth, consumer advocates and experts say.

"Most times a black family that makes a good household income gets trapped into accumulating the symbols of success, rather than recycling those assets to generate more assets," said Dale Bryant, 34, owner of The Bryant Group investment house in New York.

"I set up a company to help wage earners, and most do not make it because of their attitudes toward money," said Bryant, who worked for high-end clients at Lehman Bros. before starting his own firm in 1996 for black investors. "I have many clients with household incomes over $150,000, struggling to save $200 per month."

Debra Lee, president of Black Entertainment Television, said having extra money to save is uncharted territory for many black Americans.

"This may be the first generation of black Americans who are able to accumulate wealth," Lee said. "The community just needs to focus on it more."

Whatever the reason, a report released Thursday found that black household incomes are growing faster than wealth for those households.

The Consumer Federation of America report found that median household wealth among blacks grew 321% between 1989 and 1998, from $3,680 in 1989 to $15,500. However, that still was less than a quarter of the $71,700 accumulated by the typical American household.

According to the Census Bureau, the median income of black households rose from $18,083 in 1989 to $25,351 in 1998. The dollar amounts are adjusted for inflation.

The consumer group, Bank of America Foundation and BET.com, an arm of Black Entertainment Television, are starting "Black America Saves" to help wage-earners pursue savings and investment plans.

The program will offer free financial planning advice and information.

The Consumer Federation of America asked Ohio State University to analyze data from the Federal Reserve Board's 1998 Survey of Consumer Finances, which gathered information from more than 4,000 families. Catherine Montalto, professor of the Family Economics Department, computed net wealth by subtracting household debt from assets.

The report found that spending habits as a group do not focus on saving. Twenty-four percent of black Americans said they spend more than their income, compared to 14% of all Americans. And 32% of black Americans say they do not save, compared to 23 % of all Americans.

"It's hard to think about accumulating wealth if you're in debt," Lee said.

Consumer Federation of America Director Stephen Brobeck said blacks have not taken full advantage of investment and savings opportunities, in part because their families have little historical experience with financial planning.

Supported by the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People and the National Urban League, "Black America Saves" is modeled on about 20 smaller regional programs.

In Cleveland, for example, Brobeck found that "tremendous pessimism" discouraged low and moderate-income blacks from saving money.

"They did not think they could do it," he told reporters Thursday at the National Press Club. Information about 401(k) retirement plans, bonds, savings accounts and other methods changed the minds of some 2,000 people who became members there, he said.

"Over time, it is realistic to expect moderate income families to accumulate six-figure wealth," he said.

Washington, DC -- African-Americans are beginning to close the wealth gap with the restAmericans, according to an analysis of Federal Reserve data released today by the ConsumerFederation of America (CFA) and BET.com. From 1989 to 2001, the ratio of median blackhousehold wealth to median U.S. household wealth rose from 9.1% to 22.1%.Over the past decade, African-Americans have made significant progress closing thewealth gap which has separated them from the rest of America, said Stephen Brobeck, CFAExecutive Director. "But there is more that can be done," he added.

Yes, yes, yes. I know, afro-saxon, and zakar. dispense with the pleasantries. Cough up more of your denials, marginalizations, meaningless distractors, and dismissals as you offer no evidence of your own other than your subjective opinions to support your unsubstantiated ignorant rhetoric, rantings and ravings backed up by pointless, powerless insults. Of course as we all know, you don't have to provide any sources to support your bullshit because you're both published authorities on the African American diaspora.

Keep it coming. I can shoot you down--slowly lay you to rest one fact at a time like Chinese torture--with facts all day.

I think you could do better if what happened actually match what you say. I'm tired of you projecting your insecurities and generally vulgar attitude towards me. This internet tough routine is getting old.Like I said you links showed no improvement that I personally find substanitive, I never there were zilch. Actually I all I originally pointed out was that you links didn't support your point and I was right some of it acutually contridicted your point. Man up to your mistakes.

I do not get all the prejudice and consparicies directed towards Frats and sor's, I think they are fine orgnaizations for middle class folks. While it is idiotic for a Black to call themselves greeks the organizations themselves are harmless and on many fronts helpful.

When you can show me where Africans in America's wealth have increased from 1/2 of 1 percent, then you can talk. Other than that you can post all the skewed data you want. The fact of the matter is as a whole our wealth has not increased from 1860?

If you believe in idioted divisions on college campuses between this greek organization and that organization then they would be fine organizitation. In my opinion they only add to the division of black people in institutions of higher learning. I mean what black person in their right mind would champion Greek culture over their own and actually brand their ownselves with these Greek letters. But to each his or her own.

Like I said you links showed no improvement that I personally find substanitive,

Let me be blunt and clear in saying that nobody gives a fuck about your personal opinion of the financial progress of African Americans in The U.S.A. especially considering the fact that there are sources of the federal and economic authority, some of which I have supplied in this thread, that overwhelmingly trump your entirely subjective, unsubstantiated, moot bullshit.

quote:

I think you could do better if what happened actually match what you say.

And I think you would benefit from the advice I gave zakar: Reading is FUNdamental.

You don't fucking read--furthermore, you don't pay attention. While I will admit that I generalized in the beginning by saying: "...blacks aren't doing better now than they did 50 years ago." However, I did say: "...blacks are doing better ON A SMALL SCALE..." and even provided a link to Dr. Orlando Patterson's findings as to why blacks are worse off sociologically, of which both you and zakar completely ignored and decided to make this solely a "wealth" issue and blacks not doing any better financially now than 50 years ago.

For both of you two clowns that obviously don't know who Dr. Orlando Patterson is or what his research has consisted of as of late here is another article from the same Sociologist, Orlando Patterson, that continues to discuss the sociological dilemna of African Americans:

What has happened, I think, is that the economic boom years of the 90's and one of the most successful policy initiatives in memory "” welfare reform "” have made it impossible to ignore the effects of culture. The Clinton administration achieved exactly what policy analysts had long said would pull black men out of their torpor: the economy grew at a rapid pace, providing millions of new jobs at all levels. Yet the jobless black youths simply did not turn up to take them. Instead, the opportunity was seized in large part by immigrants "” including many blacks "” mainly from Latin America and the Caribbean.

One oft-repeated excuse for the failure of black Americans to take these jobs "” that they did not offer a living wage "” turned out to be irrelevant. The sociologist Roger Waldinger of the University of California at Los Angeles, for example, has shown that in New York such jobs offered an opportunity to the chronically unemployed to join the market and to acquire basic work skills that they later transferred to better jobs, but that the takers were predominantly immigrants.

Why have academics been so allergic to cultural explanations? Until the recent rise of behavioral economics, most economists have simply not taken non-market forces seriously. But what about the sociologists and other social scientists who ought to have known better? Three gross misconceptions about culture explain the neglect.

(The same passage I quoted from Patterson's article earlier in the thread)

The Post's survey found that 60 percent of black men attribute their plight to their own personal failures and attitudes rather than to racism. They do not underplay the persistence of racism in the United States, but they refuse to explain away their troubles by blaming the system.

The bottom line on the state of African Americans in the last 50 years: Sociological experts say blacks are worse of sociologically. Financial experts say blacks are doing better economically. Much of the failures blacks have suffered have been at their own hands rather than due to 'white supremacy'. In other words, and what I've said time and time again, the only ones that are holding us back are ourselves.

The bottom line on zakar and afro-saxon:The both of you are far right wing, black nationalists. You both subscribe to a seperatist, black supremist, fascist rationale. You both are full of shit, soar losers that make erroneous, unfounded, unsubstantiated, unsupported, subjective claims that are based on personal opinion rather than any factual evidence.

Originally posted by ZAKAR:Has the black wealth in America improved since 1860??? If you cannot answer that question you are simply running around in circles Greek boy.

You call me right wing posting a bullshyt article by Orlando Patterson. Get real.

And you're a fucking moron. First you say blacks have no wealth, then I prove you wrong AGAIN. Then you say black wealth hasn't improved, then I proved you wrong. Now you're ignorant enough to change your argment again and say black wealth hasn't improved since 1860.

Just who the fuck are you? The more you talk the more you sound more like Joe the Plumber or David Duke, the grand dragon of the KKK rather than a black man that's concerned about his community.

You don't know shit and nobody knows you--you haven't published shit and you ain't no authority on shit but you think you're in a position to dismiss countless published authority's federal reports. The fuck outta here, idiot.

Where have you proved me wrong idiot???? I specifically asked you to show me where black wealth has increased from 1860 until now but you refuse to give an answer instead you keep cartwheeling around bullshyt statistics that say nothing. In case you know fool income and wealth are too different things.

AGAIN SHOW ME WHER BLACK WEALTH HAS INCREASED IN AMERICA FROM 1860 UNTIL NOW.

I SUBMITT IT WAS AND STILL IS AT 1/2 OF 1 PERCENT PROVE ME WRONG FAGGOT!!!!

Like I said you links showed no improvement that I personally find substanitive,

Let me be blunt and clear in saying that nobody gives a fuck about your personal opinion of the financial progress of African Americans in The U.S.A. especially considering the fact that there are sources of the federal and economic authority, some of which I have supplied in this thread, that overwhelmingly trump your entirely subjective, unsubstantiated, moot bullshit.

quote:

I think you could do better if what happened actually match what you say.

And I think you would benefit from the advice I gave zakar: Reading is FUNdamental.

You don't fucking read--furthermore, you don't pay attention. While I will admit that I generalized in the beginning by saying: "...blacks aren't doing better now than they did 50 years ago." However, I did say: "...blacks are doing better ON A SMALL SCALE..." and even provided a link to Dr. Orlando Patterson's findings as to why blacks are worse off sociologically, of which both you and zakar completely ignored and decided to make this solely a "wealth" issue and blacks not doing any better financially now than 50 years ago.

For both of you two clowns that obviously don't know who Dr. Orlando Patterson is or what his research has consisted of as of late here is another article from the same Sociologist, Orlando Patterson, that continues to discuss the sociological dilemna of African Americans:

What has happened, I think, is that the economic boom years of the 90's and one of the most successful policy initiatives in memory "” welfare reform "” have made it impossible to ignore the effects of culture. The Clinton administration achieved exactly what policy analysts had long said would pull black men out of their torpor: the economy grew at a rapid pace, providing millions of new jobs at all levels. Yet the jobless black youths simply did not turn up to take them. Instead, the opportunity was seized in large part by immigrants "” including many blacks "” mainly from Latin America and the Caribbean.

One oft-repeated excuse for the failure of black Americans to take these jobs "” that they did not offer a living wage "” turned out to be irrelevant. The sociologist Roger Waldinger of the University of California at Los Angeles, for example, has shown that in New York such jobs offered an opportunity to the chronically unemployed to join the market and to acquire basic work skills that they later transferred to better jobs, but that the takers were predominantly immigrants.

Why have academics been so allergic to cultural explanations? Until the recent rise of behavioral economics, most economists have simply not taken non-market forces seriously. But what about the sociologists and other social scientists who ought to have known better? Three gross misconceptions about culture explain the neglect.

(The same passage I quoted from Patterson's article earlier in the thread)

The Post's survey found that 60 percent of black men attribute their plight to their own personal failures and attitudes rather than to racism. They do not underplay the persistence of racism in the United States, but they refuse to explain away their troubles by blaming the system.

The bottom line on the state of African Americans in the last 50 years: Sociological experts say blacks are worse of sociologically. Financial experts say blacks are doing better economically. Much of the failures blacks have suffered have been at their own hands rather than due to 'white supremacy'. In other words, and what I've said time and time again, the only ones that are holding us back are ourselves.

The bottom line on zakar and afro-saxon:The both of you are far right wing, black nationalists. You both subscribe to a seperatist, black supremist, fascist rationale. You both are full of shit, soar losers that make erroneous, unfounded, unsubstantiated, unsupported, subjective claims that are based on personal opinion rather than any factual evidence.

Facist...lol....lol....lol....lolWait now that is hilarious. Facist, I'd love for you to post something where I promoted government being centralized and government controled markets? I beleive fully in free market and people right to trade freely. Also I am not a militant actually you know being militant is the opposite of conservatism. I'm not a seperatist either actually as I never implied it should be persued by Black people as a group. I said I prefer to live around Black people. Yes, I believe in Black Nationalism but since I've done nothing on that front I'm not a Black Nationalist. So where is the substance? Back up your assertions? I guess like every other post your fall back on your shameful behavior just showing your mother raised you wrong. Please stick to the insults because when you leave that realm I find you thoroughly underwhelming. Facist.... that is still cracking me up. Boy are you slow.

Originally posted by OhBlackButterfly:~Romulus, what is the alumni "member count" (ballpark figure) for all of the black greek letter organizations...combined? What kind of impact do you think that they could have on the situations in the black community if they all had a purposeful intent on "giving back" in some way, shape, or form to the black community? Little impact? Huge? Just curious. I'm sure that some do make that effort. But, my question really is about what would happen if all of them had such an interest. You know, like we all do have some interests in common on a human level, on a cultural level. I'm just wondering about the possibilities of a "critical mass" of progressive blacks collectively descending upon the black community. I'm thinking along the lines of that "change" from the grass roots that President Obama speaks of. And I'm guessing that this is Zakar's bone of contention...not enough "give back" from blacks that think much of their personal successes and achievements. I wonder if Obama will reach out to that part of the black population specifically and seek their help with his plans. ~

Several years ago it was estimated that Alpha Phi Alpha had around 150,000 members--give or take a few thousand. So, in the interest of time, lets say the most popular BGLO's Alpha Phi Alpha, Kappa Alpha Psi, Omega Psi Phi, Phi Beta Sigma, Alpha Kappa Alpha, Delta Sigma Theta, and Zeta Phi Beta have a combined total of over a million people--give or take a few thousand.

Now, here's what you have to understand about BGLO's: The basis of fraternities and sororities is scholarship and service to the community in the collegiate level and, in particular, service to the community, on the alumni level. People on the outside looking in always assume fraternities and sororities are about nothing but partying and step shows. Socializing is a part of greek life on the collegiate and alumni levels. However, each organization has their own programs that are dedicated to addressing the various issues in the black community.

Alpha Phi Alpha, for examle, has several national programs such as Mentoring, World and National Affairs, Project Alpha, Leadership Training Institute, Alpha Academy, Go To High School, Go To College, Commission on Business, A Voteless People is a Hopeless People, Alpha Head Start Academy, Big Brothers, Big Sisters, March of Dimes, RIF, Cooperative Programs and Economic Development.

Alphas as well as any other BGLO's have helped black communities under the name of their prospective organizations, banded together in a panhellenic capacity or as individuals. There isn't a sector of the community, black or otherwise, where a frat brother or sorority sister isn't involved at the grass roots, local, state, federal or international level. True, some greeks may not be as involved as others while others make a lifelong commitment but no one can say that members of BGLO's are not involved in the black community.

The problem with people on the outside looking in is they only see greeks in action when we're wearing paraphernalia or when someone reads an article or hears a news report about some hazing activity, otherwise, we as well as our deeds and accomplishments in the black community are invisible. And 99% of the time you're not going to see a member of a BGLO running around the city in paraphernalia, particularly, the grown ass brothers and sisters that have matriculated and are serving their prospective alumni chapters of their organization throughout the community in normal street clothes. I've often run into Greeks of my own organization as well as other greek organizations that I had no idea were greek but were deeply involved in the black community on all levels. So take that into account before you listen to some idiot(s) that run around misinformed and miseducating people out of jealousy and enviousness.

You find any brothers in that picture wearing paraphernalia you let me know.

~WOW! The numbers/efforts are impressive and baffling at the same time! Approx. a million, huh? It's mindboggling to me that such an influence doesn't result in the complete and total abolishment of the "black ghetto" situation. I mean, that's a million role models is it not? How many does it take to turn southside and westside Chicago around...if that is what you really want to do? This is depressing. If a million passionate and intelligent and prosperous and forward-moving "club members" on a mission can't influence the problem enough...then what the hell? ~

Originally posted by ZAKAR:Where have you proved me wrong idiot???? I specifically asked you to show me where black wealth has increased from 1860 until now but you refuse to give an answer instead you keep cartwheeling around bullshyt statistics that say nothing. In case you know fool income and wealth are too different things.

AGAIN SHOW ME WHER BLACK WEALTH HAS INCREASED IN AMERICA FROM 1860 UNTIL NOW.

I SUBMITT IT WAS AND STILL IS AT 1/2 OF 1 PERCENT PROVE ME WRONG FAGGOT!!!!

Shut the fuck up, dumbass. You lost the argument the second you stepped your Down Syndrome ass in this thread.

Once again, you're a fucking moron. First you say blacks have no wealth, then I prove you wrong. Then you say black wealth hasn't improved, then I proved you wrong AGAIN. Now you're ignorant enough to change your argment YET AGAIN and say black wealth hasn't improved since 1860. Next you're going to say Africans in South Africa lived in huts that were bigger in 10,000 B.C. than African American homes in the United States in 2002.

Originally posted by OhBlackButterfly:~Romulus, what is the alumni "member count" (ballpark figure) for all of the black greek letter organizations...combined? What kind of impact do you think that they could have on the situations in the black community if they all had a purposeful intent on "giving back" in some way, shape, or form to the black community? Little impact? Huge? Just curious. I'm sure that some do make that effort. But, my question really is about what would happen if all of them had such an interest. You know, like we all do have some interests in common on a human level, on a cultural level. I'm just wondering about the possibilities of a "critical mass" of progressive blacks collectively descending upon the black community. I'm thinking along the lines of that "change" from the grass roots that President Obama speaks of. And I'm guessing that this is Zakar's bone of contention...not enough "give back" from blacks that think much of their personal successes and achievements. I wonder if Obama will reach out to that part of the black population specifically and seek their help with his plans. ~

Several years ago it was estimated that Alpha Phi Alpha had around 150,000 members--give or take a few thousand. So, in the interest of time, lets say the most popular BGLO's Alpha Phi Alpha, Kappa Alpha Psi, Omega Psi Phi, Phi Beta Sigma, Alpha Kappa Alpha, Delta Sigma Theta, and Zeta Phi Beta have a combined total of over a million people--give or take a few thousand.

Now, here's what you have to understand about BGLO's: The basis of fraternities and sororities is scholarship and service to the community in the collegiate level and, in particular, service to the community, on the alumni level. People on the outside looking in always assume fraternities and sororities are about nothing but partying and step shows. Socializing is a part of greek life on the collegiate and alumni levels. However, each organization has their own programs that are dedicated to addressing the various issues in the black community.

Alpha Phi Alpha, for examle, has several national programs such as Mentoring, World and National Affairs, Project Alpha, Leadership Training Institute, Alpha Academy, Go To High School, Go To College, Commission on Business, A Voteless People is a Hopeless People, Alpha Head Start Academy, Big Brothers, Big Sisters, March of Dimes, RIF, Cooperative Programs and Economic Development.

Alphas as well as any other BGLO's have helped black communities under the name of their prospective organizations, banded together in a panhellenic capacity or as individuals. There isn't a sector of the community, black or otherwise, where a frat brother or sorority sister isn't involved at the grass roots, local, state, federal or international level. True, some greeks may not be as involved as others while others make a lifelong commitment but no one can say that members of BGLO's are not involved in the black community.

The problem with people on the outside looking in is they only see greeks in action when we're wearing paraphernalia or when someone reads an article or hears a news report about some hazing activity, otherwise, we as well as our deeds and accomplishments in the black community are invisible. And 99% of the time you're not going to see a member of a BGLO running around the city in paraphernalia, particularly, the grown ass brothers and sisters that have matriculated and are serving their prospective alumni chapters of their organization throughout the community in normal street clothes. I've often run into Greeks of my own organization as well as other greek organizations that I had no idea were greek but were deeply involved in the black community on all levels. So take that into account before you listen to some idiot(s) that run around misinformed and miseducating people out of jealousy and enviousness.

You find any brothers in that picture wearing paraphernalia you let me know.

~WOW! The numbers/efforts are impressive and baffling at the same time! Approx. a million, huh? It's mindboggling to me that such an influence doesn't result in the complete and total abolishment of the "black ghetto" situation. I mean, that's a million role models is it not? How many does it take to turn southside and westside Chicago around...if that is what you really want to do? This is depressing. If a million passionate and intelligent and prosperous and forward-moving "club members" on a mission can't influence the problem enough...then what the hell? ~

If I've said it once I've said it a thousand times--a lot of black people simply don't want to be successful, they don't want help. They're perfectly happy blaming "the system" for their failed and miserable lives. There are thousands of people outside of greekdom that try their damndest to mentor, inspire, and help these fools and they choose to remain out of touch, disconnected, and non-viable. Just in my life alone I've mentored so many youth and seen them grow up to be successful yet seen so many more youth throw their lives away mainly because no matter how hard you try to help someone your efforts are futile if the environment that person goes back to undoes all the positive reinforcement you've instilled in them.

This anti-intellectualism phenomenon is slowly eating up the black race from the inside out. Millions and millions of the brightest minds can put their heads together and devise the best strategies to save the poor and downtrodden and disadvantaged but when you have ignorant ass negroes running around discouraging progress with a separatist, radical, fascist, anti-social, anti-intellectual mentality under the guise of 'black pride' you only serve to confuse those that are already succeptible to complacency and mediocrity. If the subversive message that is sent is a person is a sell-out if they achieve any kind of measurable success, then what else is there left for black youth to do but give up.

Like I said you links showed no improvement that I personally find substanitive,

Let me be blunt and clear in saying that nobody gives a fuck about your personal opinion of the financial progress of African Americans in The U.S.A. especially considering the fact that there are sources of the federal and economic authority, some of which I have supplied in this thread, that overwhelmingly trump your entirely subjective, unsubstantiated, moot bullshit.

quote:

I think you could do better if what happened actually match what you say.

And I think you would benefit from the advice I gave zakar: Reading is FUNdamental.

You don't fucking read--furthermore, you don't pay attention. While I will admit that I generalized in the beginning by saying: "...blacks aren't doing better now than they did 50 years ago." However, I did say: "...blacks are doing better ON A SMALL SCALE..." and even provided a link to Dr. Orlando Patterson's findings as to why blacks are worse off sociologically, of which both you and zakar completely ignored and decided to make this solely a "wealth" issue and blacks not doing any better financially now than 50 years ago.

For both of you two clowns that obviously don't know who Dr. Orlando Patterson is or what his research has consisted of as of late here is another article from the same Sociologist, Orlando Patterson, that continues to discuss the sociological dilemna of African Americans:

What has happened, I think, is that the economic boom years of the 90's and one of the most successful policy initiatives in memory "” welfare reform "” have made it impossible to ignore the effects of culture. The Clinton administration achieved exactly what policy analysts had long said would pull black men out of their torpor: the economy grew at a rapid pace, providing millions of new jobs at all levels. Yet the jobless black youths simply did not turn up to take them. Instead, the opportunity was seized in large part by immigrants "” including many blacks "” mainly from Latin America and the Caribbean.

One oft-repeated excuse for the failure of black Americans to take these jobs "” that they did not offer a living wage "” turned out to be irrelevant. The sociologist Roger Waldinger of the University of California at Los Angeles, for example, has shown that in New York such jobs offered an opportunity to the chronically unemployed to join the market and to acquire basic work skills that they later transferred to better jobs, but that the takers were predominantly immigrants.

Why have academics been so allergic to cultural explanations? Until the recent rise of behavioral economics, most economists have simply not taken non-market forces seriously. But what about the sociologists and other social scientists who ought to have known better? Three gross misconceptions about culture explain the neglect.

(The same passage I quoted from Patterson's article earlier in the thread)

The Post's survey found that 60 percent of black men attribute their plight to their own personal failures and attitudes rather than to racism. They do not underplay the persistence of racism in the United States, but they refuse to explain away their troubles by blaming the system.

The bottom line on the state of African Americans in the last 50 years: Sociological experts say blacks are worse of sociologically. Financial experts say blacks are doing better economically. Much of the failures blacks have suffered have been at their own hands rather than due to 'white supremacy'. In other words, and what I've said time and time again, the only ones that are holding us back are ourselves.

The bottom line on zakar and afro-saxon:The both of you are far right wing, black nationalists. You both subscribe to a seperatist, black supremist, fascist rationale. You both are full of shit, soar losers that make erroneous, unfounded, unsubstantiated, unsupported, subjective claims that are based on personal opinion rather than any factual evidence.

Facist...lol....lol....lol....lolWait now that is hilarious. Facist, I'd love for you to post something where I promoted government being centralized and government controled markets? I beleive fully in free market and people right to trade freely. Also I am not a militant actually you know being militant is the opposite of conservatism. I'm not a seperatist either actually as I never implied it should be persued by Black people as a group. I said I prefer to live around Black people. Yes, I believe in Black Nationalism but since I've done nothing on that front I'm not a Black Nationalist. So where is the substance? Back up your assertions? I guess like every other post your fall back on your shameful behavior just showing your mother raised you wrong. Please stick to the insults because when you leave that realm I find you thoroughly underwhelming. Facist.... that is still cracking me up. Boy are you slow.

The fuck is wrong with you, dumbass? Are the volumes of federal reports and articles I've posted taxing your blood deprived brain? You having trouble differentiating between the sociological deprivation and economic progress of African Americans?

In that childish little mind of yours you think because you have a short memory you think everyone else on this discussion board must also have a short memory. From the second your dropped your ass in AA.org your mantra has centered around being a black supremist as you referred to whites as a filthy, sub-human species.

When a person considers an entire race of people to be inferior, then fascism doesn't fall too far behind. In fact they are synonymous. The only difference between black supremacy and fascism is an act of violence. So, to that effect, you're a lazy, cowardly, armchair fascist.

Like I said you links showed no improvement that I personally find substanitive,

Let me be blunt and clear in saying that nobody gives a fuck about your personal opinion of the financial progress of African Americans in The U.S.A. especially considering the fact that there are sources of the federal and economic authority, some of which I have supplied in this thread, that overwhelmingly trump your entirely subjective, unsubstantiated, moot bullshit.

quote:

I think you could do better if what happened actually match what you say.

And I think you would benefit from the advice I gave zakar: Reading is FUNdamental.

You don't fucking read--furthermore, you don't pay attention. While I will admit that I generalized in the beginning by saying: "...blacks aren't doing better now than they did 50 years ago." However, I did say: "...blacks are doing better ON A SMALL SCALE..." and even provided a link to Dr. Orlando Patterson's findings as to why blacks are worse off sociologically, of which both you and zakar completely ignored and decided to make this solely a "wealth" issue and blacks not doing any better financially now than 50 years ago.

For both of you two clowns that obviously don't know who Dr. Orlando Patterson is or what his research has consisted of as of late here is another article from the same Sociologist, Orlando Patterson, that continues to discuss the sociological dilemna of African Americans:

What has happened, I think, is that the economic boom years of the 90's and one of the most successful policy initiatives in memory "” welfare reform "” have made it impossible to ignore the effects of culture. The Clinton administration achieved exactly what policy analysts had long said would pull black men out of their torpor: the economy grew at a rapid pace, providing millions of new jobs at all levels. Yet the jobless black youths simply did not turn up to take them. Instead, the opportunity was seized in large part by immigrants "” including many blacks "” mainly from Latin America and the Caribbean.

One oft-repeated excuse for the failure of black Americans to take these jobs "” that they did not offer a living wage "” turned out to be irrelevant. The sociologist Roger Waldinger of the University of California at Los Angeles, for example, has shown that in New York such jobs offered an opportunity to the chronically unemployed to join the market and to acquire basic work skills that they later transferred to better jobs, but that the takers were predominantly immigrants.

Why have academics been so allergic to cultural explanations? Until the recent rise of behavioral economics, most economists have simply not taken non-market forces seriously. But what about the sociologists and other social scientists who ought to have known better? Three gross misconceptions about culture explain the neglect.

(The same passage I quoted from Patterson's article earlier in the thread)

The Post's survey found that 60 percent of black men attribute their plight to their own personal failures and attitudes rather than to racism. They do not underplay the persistence of racism in the United States, but they refuse to explain away their troubles by blaming the system.

The bottom line on the state of African Americans in the last 50 years: Sociological experts say blacks are worse of sociologically. Financial experts say blacks are doing better economically. Much of the failures blacks have suffered have been at their own hands rather than due to 'white supremacy'. In other words, and what I've said time and time again, the only ones that are holding us back are ourselves.

The bottom line on zakar and afro-saxon:The both of you are far right wing, black nationalists. You both subscribe to a seperatist, black supremist, fascist rationale. You both are full of shit, soar losers that make erroneous, unfounded, unsubstantiated, unsupported, subjective claims that are based on personal opinion rather than any factual evidence.

Facist...lol....lol....lol....lolWait now that is hilarious. Facist, I'd love for you to post something where I promoted government being centralized and government controled markets? I beleive fully in free market and people right to trade freely. Also I am not a militant actually you know being militant is the opposite of conservatism. I'm not a seperatist either actually as I never implied it should be persued by Black people as a group. I said I prefer to live around Black people. Yes, I believe in Black Nationalism but since I've done nothing on that front I'm not a Black Nationalist. So where is the substance? Back up your assertions? I guess like every other post your fall back on your shameful behavior just showing your mother raised you wrong. Please stick to the insults because when you leave that realm I find you thoroughly underwhelming. Facist.... that is still cracking me up. Boy are you slow.

The fuck is wrong with you, dumbass? Are the volumes of federal reports and articles I've posted taxing your blood deprived brain? You having trouble differentiating between the sociological deprivation and economic progress of African Americans?

In that childish little mind of yours you think because you have a short memory you think everyone else on this discussion board must also have a short memory. From the second your dropped your ass in AA.org your mantra has centered around being a black supremist as you referred to whites as a filthy, sub-human species.

When a person considers an entire race of people to be inferior, then fascism doesn't fall too far behind. In fact they are synonymous. The only difference between black supremacy and fascism is an act of violence. So, to that effect, you're a lazy, cowardly, armchair fascist.

Where did I say whites were sub-human? Shame on you, take your ass whooping like a man and don't start lying to deflect attention from your haphazard posting of articles. When you know the difference between an article in which supports your point and one in detracts from your point then you can question my brain.LOL....So racism is facism and prejudice is facism? LOL Black Supremacy and Black Nationalism are the same thing? And all this makes one a facist? Are you dense? Facism is far more than violence and racism- most societies were built on racism and violence, most soicieties aren't Facist. Do you need a definition of facism? You do know Facism is a style of government right? Yo know one could be Facist and not racist. Man this about the dumbest shit you've said since I been on this site. And you say some dumb stuff. The further off field your semi literate rants go the more amusing they are. Stop using terms you do not understand AfroGreek.How could I take any of you article seriously when your do not understand terms learned in 9th grade history class. And you claim to went to college, sure.

Do you need a definition of facism? You do know Facism is a style of government right?

Ummmmmm. Yeah, I would need a definition on facism. I've never heard of facism. Is facism when you can't save face after sounding like a fucking idiot?

Yep, I was right. You are having problems differentiating. If anyone needs a definition it's your dumbass. Here's two working definitions of fascism and a fascist:

fas·cistn.1. often Fascist An advocate or adherent of fascism.

fas·cism n.1. often Fascisma. A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism.b. A political philosophy or movement based on or advocating such a system of government.

Here's a more purposeful definition that applies to you:

The word fascist is sometimes used to denigrate people, institutions, or groups that would not describe themselves as ideologically fascist, and that may not fall within the formal definition of the word. As a political epithet, the word fascist has been applied mainly to a broad range of people and groups on the extreme right, but also to groups on the far left and at points in between. It has also been applied to people of many religious faiths, particularly fundamentalist groups. The individual, institution, or group(s) called fascist often find the use of the term in this way to be highly offensive and inappropriate.--Wikipedia

Originally posted by Romulus Burnett:If the subversive message that is sent is a person is a sell-out if they achieve any kind of measurable success, then what else is there left for black youth to do but give up.

~Helluvalotta truth in that. And somewhere in between your truth and Zakar's truth is the the moment of clarity....because the sub-subversive message to the subversive that you've pointed to, is that "sell-outs" are only seen as sell-outs because they sell OUT. They go away and contribute ELSEWHERE. They could hardly be perceived as sell-outs if they had the OPPOSITE reputation of being the kind to stick around. Stick around and open a business. Stick around and hire some people. Stick around and fix up a home and improve property values. Home-improvement and care is very infectious. Those rows of white marble steps in Baltimore come to mind. Everybody taking pride. *sigh*

I HATE that it is so VISIBLY CLEAR where the caring and pride stops in Chicago. You know EXACTLY where the 100% black residences begin and end. And in between there is that gray area where we're probably 90%, then 80%, 50%...and so on. Just get on Chicago Avenue and ride it from one end (downtown) to the other until you run out of road and you're in Oak Park. It's insane. It goes from white, gray, black, gray, back to white. Gentrification. Follow the bread crumbs. No, those aren't bread crumbs. Those are bottles, paperbags, cans, chicken bones.

I used to go with this guy in Chicago who lived in a west suburb. Green lawns, tree-lined streets. But when he picked ME up, from where I lived on Chicago Ave., he'd start throwing his trash out the car window! Something that wouldn't even occur to him to do at his house, but gave no pause to doing in front of mine! So, my point is that you can SEE in some places where pride and caring stops and starts. You can drive right through it. There is a "that's where THEY live, and this is where WE live" thing. That's the separatism, and nobody is MAKING us do that to each other. It's a matter of taking pride and cleaning up in YOUR yard, then the neighbor doesn't want to be outdone so he does the same. Then that spreads. Then kids aren't ashamed of where they live. They are no longer a "they". And they can point to any number of black role models in the neighborhood, even if they can't point to any actually in their own home. Everybody from the neighborhood grocer, butcher, drycleaners, sit-down restaurant is black...not just the beauticians/barbers and likkastow owners. Other minorities get it. And they don't even spend money like we do. We could economically $timulate the hell out of a black community and just be running things like so many busy bees. But, we make it, and contribute OUTside, giving outsiders something to be proud of in their own busine$$e$. *sigh*

I don't think that youth would be so inclined to give up if we improved their environment and thusly their sense of worth. "Home" can't look like a dump full of questionable characters and then produce kids that have a clear and uncluttered mind when in the classroom. Becky's mind is clear and focused while LaTonya's is not, and it is NOT because Becky is smarter or LaTonya dumber. Environment is key. It can't be improved with the best and brightest leaving. That creates the separatism. It shouldn't have to take full-out LEAVING to improve a condition. That actually worsens it, or at best creates stagnance. Hence the virtual NONimprovement that Zakar mentoned. Virtual, maybe not literal. But the same ghettos from back in the day, are still festering today. That is, all but the ones that are being cleaned up and improved by OUTsiders who are moving US out (Cabrini Green, Harlem) and cashing in on the NEW property values. THAT is why our kids give up, imo. They see no power, nor caring, on the block. Now who can't empower themselves with AT LEAST an organized neighborhood makeover, and then go from there? It's our fault that the kids give up so easily, because we make the simplest and most fundamental things seem apparently unachievable. The filthy ghetto is the filthy ghetto and we live in it because.....? And, mind you, it's NOT filthy in the house. Oh, no. Only outside. Inside is spic and span. Noses wiped, hair coiffed, t-shirts ironed. But, outside....we have no control over that. That HAS to remain disgusting so that those of us that "make it" have a justifiable reason to leave and live and contribute elsewhere to ANOTHER neighborhood's property values and tax-dollar benefitted "better" neighborhood schools. So, just give up kids. Everybody can't make it OUT of here, and we're totally powerless to make HERE any better than it was decades ago. You shouldn't be able to tell where black folks live simply by checking for trash on the streets, but, hey, that's the way it is...and nobody wants to stay. So, just give up.*sigh*~

Do you need a definition of facism? You do know Facism is a style of government right?

Ummmmmm. Yeah, I would need a definition on facism. I've never heard of facism. Is facism when you can't save face after sounding like a fucking idiot?

Yep, I was right. You are having problems differentiating. If anyone needs a definition it's your dumbass. Here's two working definitions of fascism and a fascist:

fas·cistn.1. often Fascist An advocate or adherent of fascism.

fas·cism n.1. often Fascisma. A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism.b. A political philosophy or movement based on or advocating such a system of government.

Here's a more purposeful definition that applies to you:

The word fascist is sometimes used to denigrate people, institutions, or groups that would not describe themselves as ideologically fascist, and that may not fall within the formal definition of the word. As a political epithet, the word fascist has been applied mainly to a broad range of people and groups on the extreme right, but also to groups on the far left and at points in between. It has also been applied to people of many religious faiths, particularly fundamentalist groups. The individual, institution, or group(s) called fascist often find the use of the term in this way to be highly offensive and inappropriate.--Wikipedia

A misspell? That is your refuge?LOL Funny none of those definitions apply to me. I do not recall promoting stringent economic controls, centralized authority or anything of that sort..lol So why would you stupidly use such descriptors? Ad Hominem attack I suppose? But it was weak just as most your posts are...lolFascist( like it)....lol Man you are a fool. Quote something fascist like I've posted.

I've just been quietly monitoring this thread and waiting for the conversation to veer out of the discussion on Frat's...which I personally couldn't possibly give any less of a DAMN about and veer back into my territory which is economics...So here is my perspective based on what I've read so far....

quote:

Originally posted by Romulus Burnett:A Poverty of the MindBy: Orlando Patterson., New York Times

Full Article.

What has happened, I think, is that the economic boom years of the 90's and one of the most successful policy initiatives in memory "” welfare reform "” have made it impossible to ignore the effects of culture. The Clinton administration achieved exactly what policy analysts had long said would pull black men out of their torpor: the economy grew at a rapid pace, providing millions of new jobs at all levels. Yet the jobless black youths simply did not turn up to take them. Instead, the opportunity was seized in large part by immigrants "” including many blacks "” mainly from Latin America and the Caribbean.

One oft-repeated excuse for the failure of black Americans to take these jobs "” that they did not offer a living wage "” turned out to be irrelevant. The sociologist Roger Waldinger of the University of California at Los Angeles, for example, has shown that in New York such jobs offered an opportunity to the chronically unemployed to join the market and to acquire basic work skills that they later transferred to better jobs, but that the takers were predominantly immigrants.

Why have academics been so allergic to cultural explanations? Until the recent rise of behavioral economics, most economists have simply not taken non-market forces seriously. But what about the sociologists and other social scientists who ought to have known better? Three gross misconceptions about culture explain the neglect.

(The same passage I quoted from Patterson's article earlier in the thread)

The Post's survey found that 60 percent of black men attribute their plight to their own personal failures and attitudes rather than to racism. They do not underplay the persistence of racism in the United States, but they refuse to explain away their troubles by blaming the system.

The bottom line on the state of African Americans in the last 50 years: Sociological experts say blacks are worse of sociologically. Financial experts say blacks are doing better economically. Much of the failures blacks have suffered have been at their own hands rather than due to 'white supremacy'. In other words, and what I've said time and time again, the only ones that are holding us back are ourselves.

While I agree with a lot of what Dr. Patterson has to say with respect to how Blacks hold themselves back...The legacy of institutional racism and the severe impact it had on Black advancement and wealth building should never be diminished from the equation. I actually prefer Dr. Claud Anderson's (are you familar with his work?) historical perspective on this issue over Patterson's...In Dr. Andersons book "Black labor White wealth" he breaks down the systematic way in which Whites actually PURPOSELY prevented Blacks from acquiring REAL group wealth....here are some excerpts from the book....

Blacks were not permitted to establish culture-based businesses. Prior to Emancipation, the North and South enacted laws and ordinances that prohibited blacks from owning businesses that competed with whites. Even after Emancipation, that remained the case. Blacks were prohibited by the legal and social sanctions that withheld capital, market opportunities. access to resources and education from establishing businesses. Even in raising tobacco, cotton, and various livestock, where blacks had unquestionable skill, they were generally forbidden to raise and sell their products in competition with whites.

The horse racing industry is another example. After the Civil War and until the first decade of the 20th century, black jockeys dominated the horse racing industry. Although they were skilled jockeys and horse trainers, blacks were not allowed to develop any businesses based upon their experience around the tracks. By the second decade of the 20th century, horse racing had become a major sport and wealth building business. Black jockeys and trainers were replaced by white trainers and Hispanic jockeys.

Blacks were not allowed to compete with whites at any level of life. No other racial or ethnic immigrants have been confronted with such systematic opposition to their personal freedom, economic independence, and right to earn a living.

quote:

Originally posted by Romulus Burnett:claim #1 by zakar: "Blacks dont have no WEALTH...."

Answer to zakar's claim: The Consumer Federation of America report found that median household wealth among blacks grew 321% between 1989 and 1998, from $3,680 in 1989 to $15,500. However, that still was less than a quarter of the $71,700 accumulated by the typical American household.

African-Americans are beginning to close the wealth gap with the rest Americans, according to an analysis of Federal Reserve data released today by the Consumer Federation of America (CFA) and BET.com. From 1989 to 2001, the ratio of median black household wealth to median U.S. household wealth rose from 9.1% to 22.1%. Over the past decade, African-Americans have made significant progress closing the wealth gap which has separated them from the rest of America, said Stephen Brobeck, CFA Executive Director.

I believe that at the root of this confusion between the two of you is the fact the you guys are talking about two SEPARATE (no pun intended) things... Zakar seems to be referring to Black wealth as a GROUP...Yet Romulus you posted info talking about INDIVIDUAL household wealth there is a distinct difference between the two. Black wealth as a GROUP would include such things as companies, industries, infrastructures, and other MAJOR conduits of wealth in society controlled by Blacks. To be sure information about PERSONAL wealth which only includes things such as individual cash savings, investments and home equity does NOT and I repeat NOT debunk this. Besides even according to the info that YOU provided "Romey" which clearly state that Black household "wealth" was only $3680 in 1989 and $15,500 in 1998 (paltry sums on their own) accounting for LESS than a quarter of the typical American households wealth. However, when you factor in CONSUMER DEBT of which blacks have plenty of then those paltry sums are wiped out even further because NET WORTH (something I didn't see mentioned) equals ASSETS minus LIABILITIES and 90% of Black households earning between 10 to 25k a year are in debt.http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2008/09/maloney_credit03.html

Furthermore, the 321% increase of Black wealth that your article mentioned should not be taken out of context since there will always be a huge percentage jump when you are starting from NOTHING....For example if you have zero dollars and I give you $10 thats a 100% increase wheres if you already have $100 and I give you the same $10 it's only a 10% increase. So every additional dollar that Blacks get is a higher percentage increase compared to other groups only because Blacks are starting from a LOWER base number.

So what have we learned?...1) you cannot provide INDIVIDUAL personal wealth data when the question is based on cumulative GROUP wealth. 2) Even when you compare Black personal wealth to white personal wealth the numbers are paltry and when net worth is considered meaning assets minus liabilities the numbers are even worse.

Bottom line Zak's statement that "Blacks dont have no WEALTH" as a group still stands and in order for you to truly debunk this you must demonstrate all the wealth that Blacks DO possess in this country in the form of major companies, industries, infrastructures and other wealth building enterprises controlled solely by Blacks.

quote:

Originally posted by Romulus Burnett:Revised question #1 by zakar: "What is the percentage of WEALTH the black community controls in relationship to the overall Wealth of America?"

Now, let's go back to your original statement. You originally said: "blacks have no wealth", and I debunked that ignorant ass statement not with an irrational opinion such as yours but with factual information from the census bureau and the department of labor and several other sources. Furthermore:

A national poll released four years ago revealed some stunning news about the economic progress of black Americans. In a historic first, more blacks (51%) than whites (32%) reported that their economic situation had improved in the past year. And only 9% of blacks, against 17% of whites, said they were worse off. Subsequent polls have produced similar results, and even the most cursory glance at data still trickling out of the 2000 Census helps explain why.

Poverty rates are down and employment rates are up. Blacks own more homes and make more money. They occupy less-segregated communities in more-prosperous parts of the country. Graduation rates have risen both at the high school and college levels, as has the number of black-owned businesses. Racial gaps do persist generally, but in most categories the gap has narrowed, and in a few it has even disappeared. By any honest measure, blacks are significantly better off today than at any time in U.S. history.

The above data must be viewed within the context of when it was derived....If you notice this data was collected in the early 2000's right around the time two economic bubbles were taking place. The internet bubble was coming to an end and the housing bubble was just beginning. The housing bubble was initially created when the Fed dropped interest rates to historic lows and banks were encouraged to create evermore exotic loan products like ARM's to allow lower income people (specifically Blacks) to get more house than they could afford. However, as the market became saturated with speculators (specifically whites) who got into the "flipping" craze they artificially inflated ALL property values. Initially this gave people a false sense of wealth especially Blacks who's wealth is mostly tied to their homes. Many Blacks also work in fields that were impacted by the housing bubble such as Realty, Insurance, Construction, etc,...So during the boom years that could account for the spike in Black income levels.

Today the reverse is true and now that the bottom has fell out of the economy and the housing bubble has burst both Blacks and whites are less wealthy overall. However, Blacks have been effected disproportionately for the reasons I cited above i.e., over exposure to the housing bubble in the form of realiance on it for assets and income. So unlike the boom years the early 2000's (from which your data was derived) NOW in 2008 Blacks have seen their wealth DECREASE in relation to other groups so the data you provided is no longer a reflection of the current reality.

So Romulus as I hope you can now see... you never actually debunked the statement that Blacks have no wealth and unless you can provide data as I mentioned to the effect of Blacks OWNING (not managing) major industries you won't debunk it. You probably have a better chance debunking whether or not the "divine nine" are part of the boule....So my advice to you is just focus on that since you seem to know a lot more about it.

Originally posted by ZAKAR:When you can show me where Africans in America's wealth have increased from 1/2 of 1 percent, then you can talk. Other than that you can post all the skewed data you want. The fact of the matter is as a whole our wealth has not increased from 1860?

If you believe in idioted divisions on college campuses between this greek organization and that organization then they would be fine organizitation. In my opinion they only add to the division of black people in institutions of higher learning. I mean what black person in their right mind would champion Greek culture over their own and actually brand their ownselves with these Greek letters. But to each his or her own.

I didn't want to get into this but...you're wrong about our wealth hasn't increased from 1860. In 1860, the majority of the blacks in America at the time were slaves. The Civil War hasn't even started yet. How can a slave OWN wealth or property, when they themselves were also property?

The above data must be viewed within the context of when it was derived....If you notice this data was collected in the early 2000's right around the time two economic bubbles were taking place. The internet bubble was coming to an end and the housing bubble was just beginning. The housing bubble was initially created when the Fed dropped interest rates to historic lows and banks were encouraged to create evermore exotic loan products like ARM's to allow lower income people (specifically Blacks) to get more house than they could afford. However, as the market became saturated with speculators (specifically whites) who got into the "flipping" craze they artificially inflated ALL property values. Initially this gave people a false sense of wealth especially Blacks who's wealth is mostly tied to their homes. Many Blacks also work in fields that were impacted by the housing bubble such as Realty, Insurance, Construction, etc,...So during the boom years that could account for the spike in Black income levels.

All of this sounds very nice if a person doesn't have sense to understand the reason why I posted the data I posted to begin with. But to attribute THE INCREASE IN INDIVIDUAL BLACK WEALTH, INDIVIDUAL BLACK INCOME to the housing market bubble is foolish. Furthermore, you create the impression that the housing market bubble specifically targeted blacks like some kind of evil plot by the EMPIRE (yes, liediecryptor, I am peeping your cartoonish avatar) when in reality the housing market bubble was a result of people of ALL RACES biting off more house than they could chew or succombing to predatory loans that didn't clearly describe the ramifications of signing the dotted line.

As I have already proven with my own source from the CFA, the reason why blacks are still falling behind in comparison to whites is that BLACKS SPEND MORE THAN THEY SAVE AND DO NOT INVEST. So, in that effect, it isn't that blacks have "no wealth", because the rate that blacks' incomes increase is impressive. The FACT is they don't know how to make their money work for them after they have earned it nor do they know how to keep their asses out of the store.

Back to the point about the reality or the housing bubble crisis. In reality it was the combination of the housing market bubble and greed on Wallstreet that has affected EVERYONE--not just blacks but EVERYONE IN THE U.S. AND ABROAD.

I believe that at the root of this confusion between the two of you is the fact the you guys are talking about two SEPARATE (no pun intended) things... Zakar seems to be referring to Black wealth as a GROUP...Yet Romulus you posted info talking about INDIVIDUAL household wealth there is a distinct difference between the two.

This is what happens when you sit and watch rather than participate in an ongoing conversation. You're so anxious to show someone how smart you are. In the process of choking on your own arrogance you either IGNORED or you WEREN'T AWARE OF the statements zakar made in the first place. Let me bring you up to speed:

"Blacks dont have no WEALTH YOU IDIOT." --zakar

"Im still waiting on your numbers for how much wealth black people have Greek boy!" --zakar

You, lieDecryptor, give zakar too much credit where NO credit is due. zakar's dumbass DID NOT refer to black wealth as: "...such things as companies, industries, infrastructures, and other MAJOR conduits of wealth in society controlled by Blacks." You're simply putting words in zakar's mouth in order to support your own one-dimensional claim.

So, lets talk about black companies, industries, infrastructures, and other MAJOR conduits of wealth in society controlled by Blacks:

Minority businesses saw progress in 2007 but, as Census data show, much work still remains to be done

Even as the nation saw the number of minority-owned businesses grow and thrive from 1997 and 2002, the Greater Cincinnati region's black-owned businesses lost ground, according to U.S. Census data released in 2006. The number of black-owned companies in the region with more than one employee dropped 13 percent from 1997 and 2002, the data show. And revenue generated by black-owned companies dropped 30 percent during that time.

"We are still struggling when it comes to sustaining businesses of color," Love said.

Inclusion, supplier diversity Minority-owned businesses still need better access to capital and access to business leaders who can help them grow their firms strategically, Love said.

There are efforts under way to do just that.

The Cincinnati USA Regional Chamber's Minority Business Accelerator continues to focus on growing the region's sizable minority-owned firms, for example. And the Urban League's Cincinnati Economic Empowerment Center is working to help minority entrepreneurs hone their management skills to qualify for financing and take advantage of new opportunities.

Those efforts and others have been highlighted over the past 14 months in the Courier's Diversity Business Journal publications, special supplements that have focused on issues of supplier diversity and economic inclusion.

Stories have highlighted new and growing minority-owned businesses and the programs and initiatives designed to help them.

Some success stories There's Embrace Sweets, the mother-daughter pastry business with brownies that are winning hearts and mouths all over town, and Operation Give Back, a nonprofit devoted to helping youths and adults through tutoring and work programs.

Some minority-owned businesses are forming joint ventures, working together to win bigger contracts to grow their respective companies - firms such as New Concepts Janitorial Services in Roselawn, which has partnered with other local janitorial firms. Or Megen Construction Co., which has partnered with D.A.G. Construction and ProjDel to tackle projects with industry giant Turner Construction.

Then there is the substantial work of the region's largest corporations. Macy's Inc., for example, has a goal of joining the Billion Dollar Roundtable by 2008. Macy's doesn't have final minority spending figures for 2007 yet, but the company is "progressing well," said Howard Thompson, operating vice president of purchasing and supplier diversity with Macy's logistics and operations. In addition, Macy's CEO Terry Lundgren was named chairman of the National Minority Supplier Development Council, a leading business organization focused on issues of supplier diversity.

Minority Startups: A Measure of Progress A Census report shows business ownership by minorities has shot past the national average. But some say long-term success still an issue

Minority business ownership is growing significantly faster than the national average, according to new data released by the Census Bureau.

While overall business ownership in the U.S. increased by 10% between 1997 and 2002 -- the period included in the Census Bureau's 2002 Survey of Business Owners released in late July -- the number of black-owned businesses jumped 45%, Hispanic-owned ones increased by 31%, and Asian-owned ones are up 24%. Businesses owned by women, regardless of race, grew 20%.

MORE LOANS, SMALLER AMOUNTS. "The small-business neighborhood is changing," says Hector Barreto, administrator of the Small Business Administration. "We already had a strong sense of this [growth] because we've seen an incredible growth in our loans to these communities."

The SBA guarantees loans to small-business owners under several programs, including its flagship 7(a) loan program. Loans to minorities overall have increased by 27%, compared with the first three quarters of last year, and lending to women have shown an increase of almost 50%.

While part of the lending increase has resulted from the SBA's recent practice of offering more loans in smaller amounts, Barreto says a variety of evidence points to minority business growth. "We work very closely with [minority] chambers of commerce, and they also believe things are going in a positive direction," Barreto says.

LAGGING REVENUES. He attributes the overall minority gains to increasing immigration and more government attention to small business, including contracting set-asides. "In 2003, the government purchased $65.5 billion from small business, which is more than 23% of everything the government bought," he points out. "Twenty billion of that went to small, disadvantaged, and minority-owned businesses. That's a huge infusion of capital and an all-time high."

Among the different minority groups, black business ownership increased most dramatically over the six-year period, up 45%, to 1.2 million businesses in 2002. Hispanic-owned businesses grew 31%, to 1.6 million, and Asian business ownership was up 24%, to 1.1 million in 2002.

ISSUE OF SURVIVAL. The discrepancy may stem from lower penetration by black businesses into various sectors of the economy. Barreto points out that blacks are more likely to open companies in the retail and service industries, rather than in manufacturing or high-tech sectors, where receipts tend to climb higher. "Still, it's very positive that we have so many new black-owned businesses," he says, noting that younger companies also take more time to generate substantial revenues.

But while minority business leaders have generally welcomed the news, they also point out that the statistics measure ownership rates, not long-term success rates -- an issue with which younger companies particularly struggle.

Sylvia Grier, president of the Carolinas Association of Black Women Entrepreneurs, based in Charlotte, N.C., says she's not surprised by the finding that black-owned companies earn less than their counterparts. "It's not that hard lots of times to start a business," she says. "What's hard is to make money at it and stay in business. Every person of color that I know is struggling. Eventually, some of them get discouraged and go back to working for someone else."

Grier, a demolition contractor who says she has a hard time getting information about bidding on both public and private jobs, believes that despite the overall growth in black business ownership across the country, economic racism still exists against blacks, especially in her region.

FEELING MORE WELCOME. And while blacks try to patronize black-owned businesses, Grier says, the price competition from large corporations such as Wal-Mart (WMT) has made that increasingly difficult, particularly in low-income communities.

Bob Snead, president and CEO of the El Paso Black Chamber of Commerce in Texas, agrees that "racism is still out there," but says it's more hidden and less blatant today. "It's not going to jump out at you, but as long as the world stands, there's always going to be a good-old-boy network that's based on color."

Snead says his group has grown from a handful of members since its founding in 1996 to about 400 members now. During that time, he says, he has seen increasing numbers of blacks become educated about business ownership and obtain startup financing. Black small-business owners are starting to feel more comfortable going to banks and other institutional sources for loans and often find they're welcomed rather than turned away, he says.

SPANISH OUTREACH. Still, Snead says he believes the black community is not receiving enough outreach from government agencies like the SBA. Helpful programs exist, he notes, but many struggling African-American entrepreneurs don't know about them. "I don't think [the agencies] are sensitive enough in that regard," he says.

For ANY of you to sit there and ignore 400 years of slavery and the civil rights issues blacks had to overcome AFTER the end of slavery and think the only measure of success blacks should be achieving is in leaps and bounds at the same rate as whites is foolish. No race of human being on this planet has experienced the level and length of genocide and institutional racism African Americans have experienced and rebounded on a scale that you are charging your own race with.

To sit there and ignore the entrepreneurial progress blacks have made because you aren't happy with the condition your own neighborhood is childish, short-sighted, and self-centered. I've said it before and I'll say it again, and again--black people have been and are successful economically on a small scale but have not improved and in many cases have gotten worse in the last 50 years sociologically.

With all the obstacles blacks have had to overcome in 143 years--not even counting the 400 years of slavery--anyone would be igorant to sit there and dismiss ANY progress African Americans have made, particularly, in the last 50 years.

If any of you want to be so damn critical of black wealth you only have THE BLACK RACE to blame. There's only so much you can blame racism on. At what point do blacks AS INDIVIDUALS stop blaming the system and get off of their asses in considerable numbers to make a difference? What the fuck is this bullshit about "the best and brightest" needing to stay in the hood to help blacks as if black people were too ignorant and handicapped to help themselves? How the fuck do you think "the best and brightest" got out? And let's not forget the masses of "the best and brightest" that are sitting right there in prison--fools that value street cred and getting their stripes in prison over scholarship and legitimate success.

You also have to understand that if an entire race of people have experienced 400 years of slavery and over 500 years of institutional racism you cannot expect that race of people to reverse those effects in less than half or even half of that time, particularly, when in many cases blacks are their OWN worst enemy.

And as for you, ohblackbutterfly, you can sit there and cry about the slums in Chicago and inadvertently blame nearly a million members of the various BGLO's for not helping the entire African American diaspora is foolish as well as preposterous. First and foremost, The PEOPLE make the greek organizations NOT the other way around.

You can't sit there and think a person or even a group of people are automatically deemed with the power to save the masses by simple virtue of being initiated into a greek letter organization. Of those million or so members of the BGLO's almost half of that population are UNDERGRAD STUDENTS, which means they, themselves, need to be mentored, molded into productive citizens.

All BGLO's have encountered an influx of the general populous of blacks from every walk of life and are not immune to the very issues that affect African Americans as a whole. For every 1 black youth a greek member saves there's 3 or more out there that a black greek member won't reach not because that black greek member isn't trying hard enough or doesn't care but because that black youth either doesn't want to be helped or has already been claimed by the prison system, a bullet or drugs.

No matter who you are or what organization you're a member of, you can't go up in someone's house and drag them, kicking and screaming, out of their beds or drag them out of the streets. They have to WANT to come. What is a person or even a group of people to do when they exhaust every means to reach their own in order to help them when many of them RUN AWAY from assistance. With many negroes if you don't GIVE them what they want THEY WON'T GO FOR IT THEMSELVES no matter how dumb or intelligent they are.

If any of you want to be so damn critical of black wealth you only have THE BLACK RACE to blame. There's only so much you can blame racism on. At what point do blacks AS INDIVIDUALS stop blaming the system and get off of their asses in considerable numbers to make a difference? What the fuck is this bullshit about "the best and brightest" needing to stay in the hood to help blacks as if black people were too ignorant and handicapped to help themselves? How the fuck do you think "the best and brightest" got out? And let's not forget the masses of "the best and brightest" that are sitting right there in prison--fools that value street cred and getting their stripes in prison over scholarship and legitimate success.

You also have to understand that if an entire race of people have experienced 400 years of slavery and over 500 years of institutional racism you cannot expect that race of people to reverse those effects in less than half or even half of that time, particularly, when in many cases blacks are their OWN worst enemy.

And as for you, ohblackbutterfly, you can sit there and cry about the slums in Chicago and inadvertently blame nearly a million members of the various BGLO's for not helping the entire African American diaspora is foolish as well as preposterous. First and foremost, The PEOPLE make the greek organizations NOT the other way around.

You can't sit there and think a person or even a group of people are automatically deemed with the power to save the masses by simple virtue of being initiated into a greek letter organization. Of those million or so members of the BGLO's almost half of that population are UNDERGRAD STUDENTS, which means they, themselves, need to be mentored, molded into productive citizens.

All BGLO's have encountered an influx of the general populous of blacks from every walk of life and are not immune to the very issues that affect African Americans as a whole. For every 1 black youth a greek member saves there's 3 or more out there that a black greek member won't reach not because that black greek member isn't trying hard enough or doesn't care but because that black youth either doesn't want to be helped or has already been claimed by the prison system, a bullet or drugs.

No matter who you are or what organization you're a member of, you can't go up in someone's house and drag them, kicking and screaming, out of their beds or drag them out of the streets. They have to WANT to come. What is a person or even a group of people to do when they exhaust every means to reach their own in order to help them when many of them RUN AWAY from assistance. With many negroes if you don't GIVE them what they want THEY WON'T GO FOR IT THEMSELVES no matter how dumb or intelligent they are.

~I'm not so much critical of black wealth as I am critical of the behavior of black wealth. It just doesn't have the "snowball" effect that would SEEM to be an expected given. Considering the common historical bond shared, it just seems odd that one success hasn't led to another's the way other ethnic minority "wealth behavior" has. We all have "sections of town" that we live in, yet less and less "ghetto" have the Italian sections become...and the Irish...and the Chinese....and the Jewish. What started with a few families living in one storefront, turns into one family in that storefront, and the other families being able to eventually get their own, and then all of those families eventually moving into homes in the neighborhood, leaving the storefront to be soley about the housing the business. Then they eventually move OUT of that neighborhood, if desired, and head for the The Hills, with stores/business/real estate property under their belts. They built their businesses WITH each other and OFF OF each other and BECAUSE THEY DO THAT their overall condition improves VASTLY year after year, decade after decade, generation after generation. Not because of what the system gave them or withheld from them, but because they were able to USE EACH OTHER and DESIRED to do that because of THEIR OWN common historical bond that they share. So, it just boggles my mind that for all the "PRIDE" and historical bond that WE share, that we aren't able to do what they did TENFOLD. If the undercurrent of THEIR personal historic tragedies carries and so forcefully drives them to such heights and achievements, even if it only serves to AT LEAST improve aesthetics, then the undercurrent of OUR tragedy should be lifting us to the moon. They don't have what we have in that department. The only thing that comes anywhere close to comparison is the Holocaust. And they took that tragedy and pain and pride and turned a room into a multi-story building, a ghetto into a neighborhood. Humble beginnings, wealthy ends, and all of them from the school kid to the elderly is proud of their background.

So, I'm thinking that the main economic difference between us and them is that we do not invest in each other the way that they do. We don't do with our wealth what they do with theirs. They turn it inward, we turn it outward. Creating barriers back in the day that successfully kept us from competing with their white businesses, and con$suming soley from theirs and building THEIR wealth was evil GENIUS. Now, what about today? A business bubble would have benefitted us far more than a housing bubble. Sounds like some political leverage that we have failed to use.

It's not so much about the best and brightest needing to stay in the mud with the rest of us. It's about inve$ting what they've accumalated, from skills, education, time, money, back into the fold --- inward. They can still leave if they want. And it's not even about a NEED to do any of that. It's about WANTING to because of that shared common historical bond of tragedy and wanting it to lead to a mass collective accomplishment that makes our kids proud instead of so inclined to give up. It's not about TAKING FROM the best and brightest among us. I'm not suggesting opening up businesses and providing free product. I'm in favor of using each other for collective and mutually beneficial gain and making a black youth proud of all the role models that he can point to and see with his own eyes so he/she knows that living better is REACHABLE because he SEES it in front of him in real-time, not television, and not in someone else's section of town.

And as far as the BGLO's, I don't hold them accountable for the state of the black community. I never suggested that they are or should feel guilty. I just found/find it baffling and depressing that such a vast volume of intent and purpose doesn't result in much more. And if it isn't conceivable that a million bonded in purpose can make a substantial difference and change to the situation, let alone "save the masses" as you suggest, then what's up with the creation of the Million Man March concept? And mind you, I refer to the PRIDE and COMRADERIE and FORWARD MOVEMENT contained in the BGLO organizations moreso than their supposed intellect and grad status. We're talking ONE MILLION people already in the process of taking self-action and of the mind to do better and have better for themselves. I'm just thinking that this is a PERFECT group for Obama to appeal to with his grassroots movement to organize our communities into a better standing. Like a million Obama's on the street instead of in the White House with a zillion other tasks at hand. A million shining examples that higher education is reachable and a good thing, not something to be ridiculed for. When they do their work in the community, they SHOULD wear their pins and bells and whistles and represent, imo. At any rate, they get only praise from me for their efforts. I don't blame them for not helping enough. I just marvel that it ISN'T enough. There's a difference.

We should do-over that Million March on Washington, after January 2009. For some reason, we're only able to take the brothahood and sistahood that we so fondly and often profess only but so far. And others don't even really speak aloud about their bond, but they take it to the limits ---- for the most part. Not all, but some. Bad fruit exists in all trees.~

I didn't want to get into this but...you're wrong about our wealth hasn't increased from 1860. In 1860, the majority of the blacks in America at the time were slaves. The Civil War hasn't even started yet. How can a slave OWN wealth or property, when they themselves were also property?

IM GLAD YOU GOT INTO IT, IF YOU BELIEVE THE WEALTH HAS IMPROVED. SHOW ME THE EVIDENCE. there were a few hundred thousand free blacks in 1860.The fact remains blacks owned about 1/2 of 1 percent of the wealth at that time blacks own 1/2 of 1 percent now. Can you prove me wrong???? Please do

I didn't want to get into this but...you're wrong about our wealth hasn't increased from 1860. In 1860, the majority of the blacks in America at the time were slaves. The Civil War hasn't even started yet. How can a slave OWN wealth or property, when they themselves were also property?

IM GLAD YOU GOT INTO IT, IF YOU BELIEVE THE WEALTH HAS IMPROVED. SHOW ME THE EVIDENCE. there were a few hundred thousand free blacks in 1860.The fact remains blacks owned about 1/2 of 1 percent of the wealth at that time blacks own 1/2 of 1 percent now. Can you prove me wrong???? Please do

There weren't even any BLACK COLLEGES OR UNIVERSITIES IN 1860. DO SOME DAMN RESEARCH, MAN!! The Civil War doesn't start until 1861. If you would've picked the year 1890, 1910 or 1920, instead of 1860, you probably would've made your point.

here weren't even any BLACK COLLEGES OR UNIVERSITIES IN 1860. DO SOME DAMN RESEARCH, MAN!! The Civil War doesn't start until 1861. If you would've picked the year 1890, 1910 or 1920, instead of 1860, you probably would've made your point.

Like I thought you have no evidence to prove me wrong beause im right. thank you.

Originally posted by ZAKAR:here weren't even any BLACK COLLEGES OR UNIVERSITIES IN 1860. DO SOME DAMN RESEARCH, MAN!! The Civil War doesn't start until 1861. If you would've picked the year 1890, 1910 or 1920, instead of 1860, you probably would've made your point.

Like I thought you have no evidence to prove me wrong beause im right. thank you.

You certainly don't know when you've been schooled. Like I said, how can most blacks had more wealth and property in 1860, when the majority of blacks WERE "property" (i.e. slaves) in 1860? Come on, read a book or watch some "Schoolhouse Rock" or something.

But hey, if you need to be proved wrong again, just post for me, or Romulus or anyone else at AA.org.

ou certainly don't know when you've been schooled. Like I said, how can most blacks had more wealth and property in 1860, when the majority of blacks WERE "property" (i.e. slaves) in 1860? Come on, read a book or watch some "Schoolhouse Rock" or something.

But hey, if you need to be proved wrong again, just post for me, or Romulus or anyone else at AA.org.

I think the first thing you need to understand is what WEALTH actually means. Maybe thats the cause of your confusion. Im talking about Collective BLACK WEALTH. So once you understand what wealth is then talk to me .

ou certainly don't know when you've been schooled. Like I said, how can most blacks had more wealth and property in 1860, when the majority of blacks WERE "property" (i.e. slaves) in 1860? Come on, read a book or watch some "Schoolhouse Rock" or something.

But hey, if you need to be proved wrong again, just post for me, or Romulus or anyone else at AA.org.

I think the first thing you need to understand is what WEALTH actually means. Maybe thats the cause of your confusion. Im talking about Collective BLACK WEALTH. So once you understand what wealth is then talk to me .

I know very well about wealth. I think you have your timeline confused. Especially, when you're talking about comparing less than 10% of a black population of 4-5 million (that was free in 1860) in a country, that barely had 30 million, to nearly 40 million blacks, in a country of 300 million. If you're talking about black wealth, whether individual or collective, then specify your point. THEN talk to me.

I know very well about wealth. I think you have your timeline confused. Especially, when you're talking about comparing less than 10% of a black population of 4-5 million (that was free in 1860) in a country, that barely had 30 million, to nearly 40 million blacks, in a country of 300 million. If you're talking about black wealth, whether individual or collective, then specify your point. THEN talk to me.

Understanding is fundamental. I was simply talking about the percentage of black Wealth in relationship to the overall wealth of this country. But maybe you will get it one day

You know Romey people really should realize when they don't have a logical leg to stand on and just concede this fact...However, since all too often they don't but prefer to just go down swinging I don't mind dealing with that either. What you are going to find in dealing with me is that I'm not just going to do a back and forth with you by spewing vulgar insults and other such coonery and baboonery....which seems to be your comfort zone and the halmark of your posts here.

Instead I will just dig in and build a logical fortress around you until all your points have collapsed by the weight of their own foolishness. I will not stop until you are either completely exposed and concede by giving up or you have been sufficiently discredited and reduced to the point that it's obvious enough for me to just allow you to have the last word.

This is not personal I'm not really trying to humiliate you on purpose...which is why at the end of my last post I gave you an out by advising you to just focus on 'Frat' stuff....however just remember you chose not to take it so we will go a different path as follows....

quote:

Originally posted by Romulus Burnett:All of this sounds very nice if a person doesn't have sense to understand the reason why I posted the data I posted to begin with. But to attribute THE INCREASE IN INDIVIDUAL BLACK WEALTH, INDIVIDUAL BLACK INCOME to the housing market bubble is foolish. Furthermore, you create the impression that the housing market bubble was only targeted blacks when in reality the housing market bubble was a result of people of ALL RACES biting off more house than they could chew or succombing to predatory loans that didn't clearly describe the ramifications of signing the dotted line.

For starters the data that you provided was from a specific point in time when the economy was experiencing a housing bubble which as I stated Blacks had a disproportionate reliance on for their personal wealth and income. So that being the case if the housing market is booming as it was when this data was compiled (even if it's a false boom) it stands to reason that Black wealth would be artificially inflated along with it.

However, once the air is let out of this artificially inflated bubble i.e., this current housing crisis... Blacks would be disproportionately effected by it. This is the reason you now see CURRENTLY in 2008 (not just a narrow window of years with artificially inflated growth like the data you provided) articles like these.....

So your statement that "But to attribute THE INCREASE IN INDIVIDUAL BLACK WEALTH, INDIVIDUAL BLACK INCOME to the housing market bubble is foolish." Is in fact what's REALLY foolish and not rooted in reality so if you don't think the housing bubble is what artifically inflated AA "wealth" during that time then what praytell Prof. Burnett did? Was it because of all the major manufacturing, distribution, commercial and financial industries we own increasing in value over the same period? If so don't hold back that treasure trove of data that you have to support this because I would love to see it.

quote:

Originally posted by Romulus Burnett:As I have already proven with my own source from the CFA is the reason why blacks are still still falling behind in comparison to whites is that BLACKS SPEND MORE THAN THEY SAVE AND DO NOT INVEST. So, in that effect, it isn't that blacks have "no wealth", because the rate that blacks' incomes increase is impressive. The FACT is they don't know how to make their money work for them after they have earned it nor do they know how to keep their asses out of the store.

Hmmm...so you are saying that the only reason why Blacks are behind whites is soley because Blacks spend more than they earn and don't invest? That's curious because the last time I checked AMERICA (not just Blacks) spends more than it earns. So are we to believe that historically Blacks have had EQUAL opportunity in this country to amass wealth...but instead just chose to spend this "wealth" it in the "store"? a store which by the way 9.999 out of 10 times is owned by a non Black.... for reasons as I pointed out in my excerpts from "Black labor white Wealth" that are DELIBERATE against Blacks which you so conveniently omitted from your response (more on this later)

quote:

Originally posted by Romulus Burnett:Back to the point about the reality or the housing bubble crisis. In reality it was the combination of the housing market bubble and greed on Wallstreet that has affected EVERYONE--not just blacks but EVERYONE IN THE U.S. AND ABROAD.

Of course it affected everyone but we are talking about BLACKS remember? So stay FOCUSED because like I said and posted articles to prove this crisis is hitting Blacks ESPECIALLY HARD...so your attempt to evoke the plight of others who are not suffering as much as Blacks speaks volumes and is indicative of the problem with too many of us...Always trying to throw a life preserver to some other race when negro you're the one that's DROWNING...

quote:

Originally posted by Romulus Burnett:This is what happens when you sit and watch rather than participate in an ongoing conversation. You're so anxious to show someone how smart you are. In the process of choking on your own arrogance

I didn't need to participate in this conversation from the outset to know exactly whats going on...if anything taking my time to respond has given me more clarity of thought. As for me being "anxious to show someone how smart I am"...quite the contrary I'm not here to prove anything except facts and whether or not I'm 'smart' will be self evident to those who observe how well I bring out such facts.

About me being "arrogant" well...I like to think of myself as just being supremely confident and with good reason "arrogance" is sometimes unsubstantiated. The confidence I possess is always reinforced whenever I engage those of your ilk...I'm always proven right... So I mean take a walk in my shoes how would you feel?

quote:

Originally posted by Romulus Burnett: you either IGNORED or you WEREN'T AWARE OF the statements zakar made in the first place. Let me bring you up to speed:

"Blacks dont have no WEALTH YOU IDIOT." --zakar

"Im still waiting on your numbers for how much wealth black people have Greek boy!" --zakar

I didn't "ignor" anything and you're one to talk considering you conveniently overlooked the entire first half of my last post (more on that later still) I already quoted the statement "Blacks don't have no wealth" and addressed it...perhaps you would know this if you hadn't put up an ego protecting mental block regarding the first half of my last post.

The only part I didn't address of that quote was the "YOU IDIOT" part....maybe you just brought it back up because you want me to address it....well all I can say is time will tell if it rings true or not. The latter quote has also been addressed when I stated the numbers you provided didn't speak to Black GROUP wealth only Individual. Regarding the "Greek boy" part of that quote even though I know it was refering to you being in a Frat...But using the words Greek and boy in the same sentence is a bit harsh....I mean do you know what the ancient Greeks did to little boys?...he was wrong to do you like that....

quote:

Originally posted by Romulus Burnett:You, lieDecryptor, give zakar too much credit where NO credit is due. zakar's dumbass DID NOT refer to black wealth as: "...such things as companies, industries, infrastructures, and other MAJOR conduits of wealth in society controlled by Blacks." You're simply putting words in zakar's mouth in order to support your own one-dimensional claim.

Actually, I'm not trying to give too much credit to zakar or put words in his mouth.... I'm just stating how I interpreted what he said. To me he was referring to such things as companies, industries, infrastructures, and other MAJOR conduits of wealth in society controlled by Blacks and NOT personal "wealth" which is what you seem to be trying to skew this toward. Based on his statements about Blacks as a GROUP controlling only 1/2 of 1 percent of this nations wealth I feel he is correct based on the fact that Blacks don't control the REAL wealth building industries in this country...and unless you can prove otherwise you still have not debunked this point as you claim...that's all.... nothing personal against you just show REAL data.

quote:

Originally posted by Romulus Burnett:Even as the nation saw the number of minority-owned businesses grow and thrive from 1997 and 2002, the Greater Cincinnati region's black-owned businesses lost ground, according to U.S. Census data released in 2006. The number of black-owned companies in the region with more than one employee dropped 13 percent from 1997 and 2002, the data show. And revenue generated by black-owned companies dropped 30 percent during that time.

"We are still struggling when it comes to sustaining businesses of color," Love said.

Romey you are just making this too easy for me my man....I'm gonna tell you like I told someone else on this site about posting links...If you are gonna post links post those that prove YOUR point and not MINE....did you even bother to read it? I ask this because I could have just as easily posted this SAME link to prove my point...The quote above from your article clearly stated that Black owned business actually DECREASED not INCREASED but DECREASED from 1997 to 2002 in both numbers and revenue.

This just so happens to parallel with the economic boom when Blacks PERSONAL incomes rose....so why is that? it's like I said Black wealth was tied to the HOUSING BOOM and not BLACK BUSINESS which represent REAL wealth...thanks for posting a link to prove this I could not have done it better myself....Oh but your article does point out the fact that MINORITY (excluding Blacks) businesses grew and thrived during the same period.....perhaps that's just fine with you since afterall they are still minorities right?...and it shows America's progress in helping minorities....

There are nuggets like this through out your links that I can pull out... one even outright said that Black businesses are not allowed to grow due to racism... I could go through all of them but I'm sure you get the point.

quote:

Originally posted by Romulus Burnett:With all the obstacles blacks have had to overcome in 143 years--not even counting the 400 years of slavery--anyone would be igorant to sit there and dismiss ANY progress African Americans have made, particularly, in the last 50 years.

If any of you want to be so damn critical of black wealth you only have THE BLACK RACE to blame. There's only so much you can blame racism on. At what point do blacks AS INDIVIDUALS stop blaming the system and get off of their asses in considerable numbers to make a difference? What the fuck is this bullshit about "the best and brightest" needing to stay in the hood to help blacks as if black people were too ignorant and handicapped to help themselves? How the fuck do you think "the best and brightest" got out? And let's not forget the masses of "the best and brightest" that are sitting right there in prison--fools that value street cred and getting their stripes in prison over scholarship and legitimate success.

You also have to understand that if an entire race of people have experienced 400 years of slavery and over 500 years of institutional racism you cannot expect that race of people to reverse those effects in less than half or even half of that time, particularly, when in many cases blacks are their OWN worst enemy.

I find it odd that during this soap box rant you manage to on the one hand talk about all the obstacles Blacks face and you laud Blacks for doing so well economically in spite of this.... yet you in the same breath blame Blacks for not being in a better condition.

You toss out the terms "400 years of slavery" and over "500 years of institutional racism" as if it existed in a vacuum and like there would not be any SOCIOLOGICAL (not just economic) ramifications behind all that. It's just like even YOU said "you cannot expect that race of people to reverse those effects in less than half or even half of that time" can't you see that this is not just limited to economics it also goes for SOCIAL dysfunction. Now I'm no Black apologist and I can't stand the unbridled NEGRODIAN idiocy and behavior I see displayed by SOME black folks any more than the next guy. However, I understand that one reason we as a people can't properly deal with the worst elements of us in our mist is because we don't have our own sovereignty and are forced to live under this country's CRIMINAL justice system which just keeps dumping the same worthless negroes back into our communities.

Lastly, Romster as promised I'm going to address your selective myopia of not seeing the first half of my last post...which I don't blame you because it TOTALLY debunks your claims but here it is again for your viewing pleasure enjoy.....

While I agree with a lot of what Dr. Patterson has to say with respect to how Blacks hold themselves back...The legacy of institutional racism and the severe impact it had on Black advancement and wealth building should never be diminished from the equation. I actually prefer Dr. Claud Anderson's (are you familar with his work?) historical perspective on this issue over Patterson's...In Dr. Andersons book "Black labor White wealth" he breaks down the systematic way in which Whites actually PURPOSELY prevented Blacks from acquiring REAL group wealth....here are some excerpts from the book....

Blacks were not permitted to establish culture-based businesses. Prior to Emancipation, the North and South enacted laws and ordinances that prohibited blacks from owning businesses that competed with whites. Even after Emancipation, that remained the case. Blacks were prohibited by the legal and social sanctions that withheld capital, market opportunities. access to resources and education from establishing businesses. Even in raising tobacco, cotton, and various livestock, where blacks had unquestionable skill, they were generally forbidden to raise and sell their products in competition with whites.

The horse racing industry is another example. After the Civil War and until the first decade of the 20th century, black jockeys dominated the horse racing industry. Although they were skilled jockeys and horse trainers, blacks were not allowed to develop any businesses based upon their experience around the tracks. By the second decade of the 20th century, horse racing had become a major sport and wealth building business. Black jockeys and trainers were replaced by white trainers and Hispanic jockeys.

Blacks were not allowed to compete with whites at any level of life. No other racial or ethnic immigrants have been confronted with such systematic opposition to their personal freedom, economic independence, and right to earn a living.

Furthermore, the 321% increase of Black wealth that your article mentioned should not be taken out of context since there will always be a huge percentage jump when you are starting from NOTHING....For example if you have zero dollars and I give you $10 thats a 100% increase wheres if you already have $100 and I give you the same $10 it's only a 10% increase. So every additional dollar that Blacks get is a higher percentage increase compared to other groups only because Blacks are starting from a LOWER base number.

So what have we learned?...1) you cannot provide INDIVIDUAL personal wealth data when the question is based on cumulative GROUP wealth. 2) Even when you compare Black personal wealth to white personal wealth the numbers are paltry and when net worth is considered meaning assets minus liabilities the numbers are even worse.

Bottom line Zak's statement that "Blacks dont have no WEALTH" as a group still stands and in order for you to truly debunk this you must demonstrate all the wealth that Blacks DO possess in this country in the form of major companies, industries, infrastructures and other wealth building enterprises controlled solely by Blacks.

Before I dismantle your "logical fortress (more like a little sand castle )" I'm going to pause for a second to mention that link about the House of Reps passing the credit carholder's bill of rights you put up:

I got fucked like that. I called HSBC and told them to drop dead and they mailed me back the lump of money they swindled from me. Capitol One simply erased the charge. From now on my balance stays within one payment of being paid off just to maintain a history of on-time payments.

Now back to you, liediecryptor. Here's where you fucked up:

quote:

Actually, I'm not trying to give too much credit to zakar or put words in his mouth.... I'm just stating how I interpreted what he said.

This is how you fucked up: You decided to "interpret" what zakar said when zakar himself has the intellect of a 12-year-old Down Syndrome child. As I clearly pointed out, he flip-flopped his statements and changed his statements again and again. He flipped from the black community to just total black wealth and then flipped back again and started talking about black wealth in comparison to the rest of the United States. Then he turned around AGAIN and tried to compare the contemporary wealth of millions of African Americans to slaves from the 1860's. I don't give a damn how smart and thorough a person is, when you have an idiot that flip flops and changes with every statement he makes because, first of all, he has little or no grasp of the english language (yet CLAIMS he graduated from college ) and secondly, he realizes after he's made one idiotic statement he tries to throw another dumbass statement out there to mislead, you're going to end up looking stupid trying to make sense of his unsubstantiated stupidity. But don't worry, son. I'm here to help you.

Now, lets move on to the next part of business. Here's what you said when you first jumped into the conversation:

quote:

Originally posted by liediecryptor: Posted November 16, 2008 03:02 AM

While I agree with a lot of what Dr. Patterson has to say with respect to how Blacks hold themselves back...The legacy of institutional racism and the severe impact it had on Black advancement and wealth building should never be diminished from the equation.

Then you turn around and say:

quote:

Originally posted by liediecryptor: Posted November 16, 2008 08:31 PM

Of course it affected everyone but we are talking about BLACKS remember? So stay FOCUSED....

...which conflicts with what you previously said, which was:

quote:

Originally posted by liediecryptor: Posted November 16, 2008 03:02 AM

Today the reverse is true and now that the bottom has fell out of the economy and the housing bubble has burst both Blacks and whites are less wealthy overall.

You can't have it both ways, dude. You can't say 'we're only talking about blacks' but then turn around and say 'blacks were disproportionately affected by the housing bubble in reference to whites', which is what you said later on down the line. Either we're talking about blacks altogether without comparison to whites or we put the whole equation together. You can't pick and choose what only supports your little theory and throw out the rest.

Firstly, those little statments you've effectively contradicted, thereby, dismissed your own reasoning to compare blacks' wealth as a group and/or as individuals to whites and call black wealth "paultry" in comparison yet agree that blacks hold themselves back AS WELL AS acknowledge the setbacks of institutional racism, and have an all or nothing mentality about black wealth--act like black wealth, whether individual or collective, should be close to if not synonymous with white wealth or it doesn't exist at all. If you only wanted to talk about blacks, then talk about the progress blacks have made and let those facts stand alone. Talk about the progress blacks have made in spite of 400 years of slavery and over 500 years of institutionalized racism.

Secondly, reason why your little sand castle is washing away with the tide is you've built your argument entirely on the assumption of what you THOUGHT you interpreted from zakar's crack-brained negronomics. zakar's entire reason for sticking his neck in this thread was he felt that successful blacks need to stay in the black community and help those in need. Now, when someone talks about staying in the black community and talking about black people as a "group" the two are synonymous with a limited and lower middle class to low class environment, not a corporate environment. The "black community" is most definately not synonymous with a " MAJOR CONDUITSOF WEALTH" I don't give a damn how you word it or what you THOUGHT zakar was talking about--you should be ashamed of yourself to even try to PULL a little stunt like that.

I like this part too:

quote:

You toss out the terms "400 years of slavery" and over "500 years of institutional racism" as if it existed in a vacuum and like there would not be any SOCIOLOGICAL (not just economic) ramifications behind all that.

Hmmmm. I believe that's why I quoted Dr. Orlando Patterson's take on the subject from a SOCIOLOGICAL point of view--since he IS a sociologist last time I checked.

quote:

There are nuggets like this through out your links that I can pull out...

And you make little comments like this as if I didn't INTEND for anyone to access the FULL ARTICLE in a link I provided with every passage I quoted from the articles I linked? Come on, man. Keep up with me.

All of that is some funny shit. But lets get on to the next part of business shall we? You keep crying about me ignoring your initial post when I had already read it a long time ago, which was why I shifted the conversation away from individual black wealth to the wealth of black businesses by posting links to articles that talked about black businesses and its progress. But all you decided to do was focus on one aspect of that article. You deliberately ignored the overall theme of the article, which was the progress--however little it was--that black businesses had made the previous year. Instead, you focused on how poorly the businesses in the Ohio region did in relation to the rest of the country. And to that I say a big DUH. The Cleveland region and, hell, the Detroit region for that matter, has been in the tank for decades. There was no new or shocking news there.

SO, what have we REALLY learned? In the history of the United States of America, regardless of how money was made and how MUCH was made, albeit was made legitimately, money has been lost.

So lets be REAL shall we? Sure, whatever affects the American economy negatively will affect blacks disproportionately worse than whites because whites have had a 500+ year head start on blacks. Neither Hispanics nor Asians and not even Jewish people were were treated as inhumanely as blacks. The only other race of human beings that were treated as badly if not worse than blacks were the American Indians and they didn't survive nearly as well as blacks have.

So how did college educated blacks end up doing better than uneducated or undereducated blacks? Hmmmm. To answer that question you go back to the college campuses where these educated people came from. These people didn't come to the various colleges and universities as a GROUP. They came to these institutions of higher learning as INDIVIDUALS. When the immigrants came to America they came as INDIVIDUALS. More often than not, no matter how large or small the family was that came to America it was the head of the family that had the business head and either got together with another business-minded person or worked alone at figuring out how to capture the American dream. The same applies today.

What ELSE have we learned? Stop focusing on what white people are doing--what they have and what we don't have--and be about the business of empowering yourselves.

Having wealth and knowing how to KEEP wealth are two differnt things. You have to have wealth in order to run up over 700 billion dollars a year in revenue to OTHER races of people. Black people as a GROUP cannot be successful in starting up or maintaining a business or amassing wealth, particularly, as INDIVIDUALS if they do not know how money works, if they don't learn how to SAVE and INVEST more than SPEND as INDIVIDUALS. If they don't KNOW how money works--not only how it's made but how to make your dollar work for you--then they need to LEARN.

Originally posted by Romulus Burnett:Before I dismantle your "logical fortress (more like a little sand castle ) This is how you fucked up: You decided to "interpret" what zakar said when zakar himself has the intellect of a 12-year-old Down Syndrome child. and secondly, he realizes after he's made one idiotic statement he tries to throw another dumbass statement out there to mislead, you're going to end up looking stupid trying to make sense of his unsubstantiated stupidity. But don't worry, son. I'm here to help you.

You have yet to "dismantle" anything I've said.... I see nothing more from you than your predictable trademark insult throwing (similar to a caged primate throwing his excrement) which is not really even aimed at me you are still sniping at zakar who's not even here...remember you're now talking to LieDecrypter so once again FOCUS (do you have friggin ADHD or something?) Anyway, if I'm a "sand castle" builder then I got it honest since my ancestors built the Great Pyramids and all...although judging by what I've read from you the fortress of logic I have around you may be overkill since your logic may not be enough for you to even escape a sand box.

quote:

Originally posted by Romulus Burnett:

Now, lets move on to the next part of business. Here's what you said when you first jumped into the conversation:

quote:

Originally posted by liediecryptor: Posted November 16, 2008 03:02 AM

While I agree with a lot of what Dr. Patterson has to say with respect to how Blacks hold themselves back...The legacy of institutional racism and the severe impact it had on Black advancement and wealth building should never be diminished from the equation.

Then you turn around and say:

quote:

Originally posted by liediecryptor: Posted November 16, 2008 08:31 PM

Of course it affected everyone but we are talking about BLACKS remember? So stay FOCUSED....

...which conflicts with what you previously said, which was:

quote:

Originally posted by liediecryptor: Posted November 16, 2008 03:02 AM

Today the reverse is true and now that the bottom has fell out of the economy and the housing bubble has burst both Blacks and whites are less wealthy overall

You're just gasping for air in order to try to stay in the game at this point Romey....Those statements in no way contradict each other and anyone with all of a pre kindergarten level of reading comprehension can deduce that. For one the first statement you quoted was referring to the legacy of institutional racism from a historic point of view. The second statement you quoted was not even in the same post as the first....and was a direct and specific response to you're Mr Bojangles "The Good Negro" like attempt to save YT by evoking their suffering during this crisis and to minimize Blacks when Blacks are suffering more.

The third statement you quoted does not contradict either of the first two since it was a general statement about the overall economy which is true. Furthermore based on what preceded it the reader already knows (assuming their comprehension is up to par) that the focus is on the small and fragile amount of "wealth" Blacks have in relation to whites....So if a general statement is made talking about how both Blacks and whites are affected in this crisis the reader knows Blacks are affected more....You're gonna have to come much better than this.

quote:

Originally posted by Romulus Burnett:You can't have it both ways, dude. You can't say 'we're only talking about blacks' but then turn around and say 'blacks were disproportionately affected by the housing bubble in reference to whites', which is what you said later on down the line. Either we're talking about blacks altogether without comparison to whites or we put the whole equation together. You can't pick and choose what only supports your little theory and throw out the rest..

Here is a free of charge lesson in logic for you...me trying to "having it both ways" would be if I said something to the effect of "Blacks have been victimized by 500 years of racism" and then turn around and say "Blacks only have themselves to blame" like you tried to do a few rants ago or when you said earlier in this thread...

"sure blacks may be closing the achievement gaps and various other sociological and economic gaps on a small scale. However, overall, many blacks are not doing as well, firstly, as their predecessors and in many cases are worse off than their predessors, whereas, overall with whites, whites have shown a sustainable gain primarily because they have demonstrated the ability to pass their wealth and ideologies onto their children.

Now you are trying to play up Black achievement but then you were down playing it make up your freakin' mind already either we got it going on or we don't

By the way you're not slick I never said that we are *only* talking about Blacks as if I would not mention other races in my analysis afterall every experiment needs a control....So your little addition of the word *only* (a subtle but important change ) in my original quote "we are talking about blacks" doesn't fly pal.My statement about Blacks condition in relation to whites does not conflict with the theme because I'm still talking about the condition of Blacks....it's a contrast not a contradiction..learn the difference.

quote:

Originally posted by Romulus Burnett:Firstly, those little statments you've effectively contradicted, thereby, dismissed your own reasoning to compare blacks' wealth as a group and/or as individuals to whites and call black wealth "paultry" in comparison yet agree that blacks hold themselves back AS WELL AS acknowledge the setbacks of institutional racism, and have an all or nothing mentality about black wealth--act like black wealth, whether individual or collective, should be close to if not synonymous with white wealth or it doesn't exist at all. If you only wanted to talk about blacks, then talk about the progress blacks have made and let those facts stand alone. Talk about the progress blacks have made in spite of 400 years of slavery and over 500 years of institutionalized racism. .

I've already pointed out the difference between a CONTRAST and a CONTRADICTION above so this redundant paragraph of yours is mostly moot....Once again contrasting what Blacks DON'T have in relation to what whites DO have is STILL talking about what Blacks DON'T have so the theme is the same with no contradiction. Furthermore, you're rather daft statement that we should only talk about the "progress" Blacks have made instead of talking about the things stolen from us is like only talking about the crumbs left on the floor after your house was robbed and not even mentioning the valuables that were stolen.

quote:

Originally posted by Romulus Burnett:Secondly, reason why your little sand castle is washing away with the tide is you've built your argument entirely on the assumption of what you THOUGHT you interpreted from zakar's crack-brained negronomics. zakar's entire reason for sticking his neck in this thread was he felt that successful blacks need to stay in the black community and help those in need. Now, when someone talks about staying in the black community and talking about black people as a "group" the two are synonymous with a limited and lower middle class to low class environment, not a corporate environment. The "black community" is most definately not synonymous with a " MAJOR CONDUITSOF WEALTH" I don't give a damn how you word it or what you THOUGHT zakar was talking about--you should be ashamed of yourself to even try to PULL a little stunt like that..

My interpretation of zakars idea of Black wealth is more accurate than yours.... every statement up to this point has been as it relates to Black GROUP wealth..you're the only one still trying to make this an INDIVIDUAL thing. So if anything you're the one who has built his entire argument on shakey ground. You have yet to effectively deal with issue of Black GROUP wealth while I have addressed both GROUP and INDIVIDUAL wealth and showed they are paulry on both fronts due in large part to the history of institutional racism....which even you acknowledge... yet can't make the mental leap to see how that's held Blacks back....

quote:

Originally posted by Romulus Burnett:I like this part too:

quote:

You toss out the terms "400 years of slavery" and over "500 years of institutional racism" as if it existed in a vacuum and like there would not be any SOCIOLOGICAL (not just economic) ramifications behind all that.

Hmmmm. I believe that's why I quoted Dr. Orlando Patterson's take on the subject from a SOCIOLOGICAL point of view--since he IS a sociologist last time I checked. .

Just because you quoted Dr. Patterson changes nothing when you Romulus Burnett (who's not a sociologist I presume) in your own rantings are soley Blaming Blacks for their socio-economic condition and only mentioning white oppression when it's convenient.

quote:

Originally posted by Romulus Burnett:quote: There are nuggets like this through out your links that I can pull out...

And you make little comments like this as if I didn't INTEND for anyone to access the FULL ARTICLE in a link I provided with every passage I quoted from the articles I linked? Come on, man. Keep up with me. FPRIVATE "TYPE=PICT;ALT=Roll Eyes" .

The fact that you intended for anyone to access the full article is the thing that's so sad....Those articles only proved that Blacks businesses are lagging behind all others and a lot of it has to do with institutional racism.....You're the one that's behind and getting smaller in my rear view mirror all the time.

quote:

Originally posted by Romulus Burnett:All of that is some funny shit. But lets get on to the next part of business shall we? You keep crying about me ignoring your initial post when I had already read it a long time ago, which was why I shifted the conversation away from individual black wealth to the wealth of black businesses by posting links to articles that talked about black businesses and its progress. But all you decided to do was focus on one aspect of that article. You deliberately ignored the overall theme of the article, which was the progress--however little it was--that black businesses had made the previous year. Instead, you focused on how poorly the businesses in the Ohio region did in relation to the rest of the country. And to that I say a big DUH. The Cleveland region and, hell, the Detroit region for that matter, has been in the tank for decades. There was no new or shocking news there. .

Well you're the genius who tried to prove "Black progress" by posting an article from freakin' Ohio a rust belt state...So don't start pouting and moaning because I happened to take the stats in YOUR article which showed Black businesses DECREASING... Besides the overall theme of those articles did NOTHING to address my excerpts from "Black Labor white Wealth" except CONFIRM what it said you're data debunked nothing and the fact that you thought it would shows very poor judgment on your part...like George Bush with a gigantic MISSION ACCOMPLISHED banner behind him.

quote:

Originally posted by Romulus Burnett:SO, what have we REALLY learned? In the history of the United States of America, regardless of how money was made and how MUCH was made, albeit was made legitimately, money has been lost. .

Blacks lost a helluva lot more in this country then anybody and our losses are not limited within these 50 states like the NDN's either....

quote:

Originally posted by Romulus Burnett:So lets be REAL shall we? Sure, whatever affects the American economy negatively will affect blacks disproportionately worse than whites because whites have had a 500+ year head start on blacks. Neither Hispanics nor Asians and not even Jewish people were were treated as inhumanely as blacks. The only other race of human beings that were treated as badly if not worse than blacks were the American Indians and they didn't survive nearly as well as blacks have. .

It's telling that you would premise this paragraph with the statement "So lets be REAL shall we?" because ironically everything you go on to say I've been beating in your head for the past two days I've been REAL but I'm glad this is all starting to sink into that granite like cranium of yours

quote:

Originally posted by Romulus Burnett:So how did college educated blacks end up doing better than uneducated or undereducated blacks? Hmmmm. To answer that question you go back to the college campuses where these educated people came from. These people didn't come to the various colleges and universities as a GROUP. They came to these institutions of higher learning as INDIVIDUALS. When the immigrants came to America they came as INDIVIDUALS. More often than not, no matter how large or small the family was that came to America it was the head of the family that had the business head and either got together with another business-minded person or worked alone at figuring out how to capture the American dream. The same applies today. .

You sound like a HISSTORY teacher in one of those white bred after school specials giving the "sanitized" or should I say Sean "Hannitized" version of how this country was founded... It's a good thing I know my history so I didn't fall for that drivel....Otherwise you would have had me singing the "Star Spangled freakin' Banner" after that one....

quote:

Originally posted by Romulus Burnett:What ELSE have we learned? Stop focusing on what white people are doing--what they have and what we don't have--and be about the business of empowering yourselves. .

How about we continue to focus on what whites are doing AND empower ourselves these things are not mutually exclusive .

quote:

Originally posted by Romulus Burnett:Having wealth and knowing how to KEEP wealth are two differnt things. You have to have wealth in order to run up over 700 billion dollars a year in revenue to OTHER races of people. Black people as a GROUP cannot be successful in starting up or maintaining a business or amassing wealth, particularly, as INDIVIDUALS if they do not know how money works, if they don't learn how to SAVE and INVEST more than SPEND as INDIVIDUALS. If they don't KNOW how money works--not only how it's made but how to make your dollar work for you--then they need to LEARN..

I see you really don't understand the difference between INCOME and WEALTH do you? The 700 billion dollars that Blacks generate when CONTRASTED with the 14 TRILLION that whites bring home ain't a lot. Besides the Fed just Blew through 700 billion dollars in less than a month so you see how much that gets you these days.

P.S.

By the way if you're going to attempt to play with my name could you at least be just a tad bit more creative?....as the resident court jesture I would expect better from you than "liediecryptor"... Over the years I've sparred with folks both white and Black who came up with some nice ones I will share some of these gems from my past vanquished opponents just to give you some inspiration....

I've been called "LIEDecrpyter", "LieDecryptkeeper", "LieDetector" and my personal favorite "LieDispenser" ... I'm not trying to steal your thunder just trying to lend you a hand to make this interesting because you need it....So step your game up.

I'm having a hard time figuring out which idiot cartoon character fits your over inflated, delusional ego best...

Should it be Cobra Commander:

You have yet to "dismantle" anything I've said.... I see nothing more from you than your predictable trademark insult throwing (similar to a caged primate throwing his excrement) which is not really even aimed at me you are still sniping at zakar who's not even here...remember you're now talking to LieDecrypter so once again FOCUS (do you have friggin ADHD or something?) Anyway, if I'm a "sand castle" builder then I got it honest since my ancestors built the Great Pyramids and all...although judging by what I've read from you the fortress of logic I have around you may be overkill since your logic may not be enough for you to even escape a sand box. COOOOOBRAAAAAAAAA!!! HSSSSSSS!!!

...or Serpentor?

You have yet to "dismantle" anything I've said.... I see nothing more from you than your predictable trademark insult throwing (similar to a caged primate throwing his excrement) which is not really even aimed at me you are still sniping at zakar who's not even here...remember you're now talking to LieDecrypter so once again FOCUS (do you have friggin ADHD or something?) Anyway, if I'm a "sand castle" builder then I got it honest since my ancestors built the Great Pyramids and all...although judging by what I've read from you the fortress of logic I have around you may be overkill since your logic may not be enough for you to even escape a sand box. THIS I COMMAND!!!!!

You're on crack, liediecryptor. And I don't have the time to completely dismantle your foolishness in one fell swoop but don't take my response as 'he's given up because he's crumbling in the wake of my superior intellect' kind of delusional shit like what you're smoking. Despite the economy being in a recession I do have a job as well as wealth to maintain. Unlike the select number of blacks you're trying to base your entire argument on that succombed to predatory lending I didn't scoop up any of those predatory loans because I didn't need one. My primary profession is also recession proof, so life goes on for me like millions of other black people.

Despite the economy being in a recession I do have a job as well as wealth to maintain. Unlike the select number of blacks you're trying to base your entire argument on that succombed to predatory lending I didn't scoop up any of those predatory loans because I didn't need one. My primary profession is also recession proof, so life goes on for me like millions of other black people.

Just made my point idiot. You are nothing more than a self absorbed asshole. Only talking about what your punk as has, no concept of group economics whatsoever. No wonder you cannot grasp basic math. All those fancy words you use to say nothing!!A clown in the truest form

Despite the economy being in a recession I do have a job as well as wealth to maintain. Unlike the select number of blacks you're trying to base your entire argument on that succombed to predatory lending I didn't scoop up any of those predatory loans because I didn't need one. My primary profession is also recession proof, so life goes on for me like millions of other black people.

Just made my point idiot. You are nothing more than a self absorbed asshole. Only talking about what your punk as has, no concept of group economics whatsoever. No wonder you cannot grasp basic math. All those fancy words you use to say nothing!!A clown in the truest form

There'll be more to come...

Zakar, this probably should be in another thread topic, but i was reading up on the state of my birth (mississippi) and discovered that in 1860 55% of the population of mississippi was enslaved, but shortly after the end of slavery from about 1870-1890, many black people owned land and became farmers

lo and behold, Mississippi rewrote the constitution and erected barriers for black farmers...this in tandem with economic problems stripped black landowners of their farms...blacks began flooding north to cities like chicago, detroit, etc in record numbers since 1910

It's quite possible that we did own a significantly larger portion of land/businesses back in the day...

we definitely don't have the same amount of land that we had back in 1890

Despite the economy being in a recession I do have a job as well as wealth to maintain. Unlike the select number of blacks you're trying to base your entire argument on that succombed to predatory lending I didn't scoop up any of those predatory loans because I didn't need one. My primary profession is also recession proof, so life goes on for me like millions of other black people.

Just made my point idiot. You are nothing more than a self absorbed asshole. Only talking about what your punk as has, no concept of group economics whatsoever. No wonder you cannot grasp basic math. All those fancy words you use to say nothing!!A clown in the truest form

There'll be more to come...

zakar, you need to shut your bitch ass up. "Blacks don't have no wealth." Dumbass. You had your chance to speak your mind as you kept CHANGING your ignorant ass statements when you realized you sounded like a damn fool. Keep on sucking ass.

Just made my point idiot. You are nothing more than a self absorbed asshole. Only talking about what your punk as has, no concept of group economics whatsoever.

I'm a self-absorbed asshole because I didn't fall for a predatory "subprime" loan and wouldn't want one if I was in a position to need one (I'd rather RENT than fuck myself with a risky loan)--I know how to follow the path of my family and put myself in a career that is not dependent on supply and demand, and I know how to save and invest? I love it because there's thousands upon thousands more assholes, uppity, educated negroes like me, out there moving right along with their lives.

Remove From Your Block List

Manage Follow Preferences

Block

When you block a person, they can no longer invite you to a private message or post to your profile wall. Replies and comments they make will be collapsed/hidden by default. Finally, you'll never receive email notifications about content they create or likes they designate for your content.